[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49AB2C78.9010401@zytor.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:46:48 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: core dom0 support
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>
>> What do you define as "full PAT"? If what you mean is that Xen lays
>> claims to the PAT MSR and only allows a certain mapping that's hardly
>> a problem... other than that it's not an exhaustible resource so I
>> guess I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.
>
> It does not allow guests to set their own PAT MSRs. It can't easily be
> multiplexed either, as all CPUs must have the same settings for their
> PAT MSRs. I guess it could be handled by allowing domains to set their
> own virtual PAT MSRs, and then rewriting the ptes to convert from the
> guest PAT settings to Xen's, but I don't know if this is possible in
> general (and it poses some problems because the pte modifications would
> be guest-visible).
>
It would make a lot more sense to simply specify a particular set of
mappings. Since the only one anyone cares about that isn't in the
default set is WC anyway, it's easy to do.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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