Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] Allow bitmasks with the badpage bootoption

["Erik Bosman" <ebosman@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 4/5/06, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The masking scheme is unnecessarily restrictive. Why not just allow
> specification of inclusive ranges of pages? For example:
> badpage=0xa2000-0xa2fff,0x100-0x1ff,0x123-0x456
>
>   -- Keir
>

This was how I first implemented it for my machine, since it only requires
two ranges: badpage=0x2a000-0x2afff,0x3a000-0x3afff

But I thought a mask would be better since it resembles the way memory
usually breaks (not that I have much experience with this.)

On the other hand, ranges are much easier to understand.

I've attached my original patch.

Erik Bosman

Attachment: badpage-range.patch
Description: Text Data

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel