[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47992DD9.8060604@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:31:21 -0800
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Mika Penttilä <mika.penttila@...umbus.fi>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Construct 32 bit boot time page tables in native
format.
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> No, if Xen wasn't an issue there wouldn't be anything to do for the
> PAE case at all (since the PGD is trivial.)
>
> Copying PMDs is more or less an analogous case of the !PAE case, once
> the allocation is already done. The allocation should be trivial
> though, since this would be a one-time thing.
I think we're in vehement agreement here. In either case, its just a
matter of something like:
memcpy(pgd, &pgd[USER_PTRS_PER_PGD], sizeof(pgd_t) * KERNEL_PTRS_PER_PGD);
which would work for both PAE and non-PAE.
>> It would be easy enough to add some code on xen side to look for pmd
>> aliases when using/pinning a pagetable, and allocate'n'copy a new pmd
>> page as needed. That way the core code can ignore the issue.
>
> As much as I'd rather see Xen fixing this than having it continue to
> impact the kernel, I presume it will take some time to flush the
> broken hypervisors out?
Sorry, I was unclear. I meant in the purely Xen-specific parts of the
kernel (arch/x86/xen). It wouldn't require a hypervisor change.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists