RE: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit

["Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ian Pratt wrote:
>>> No, it gets shifted right 12 and *then* converted to a long. So you
>>> get a 44-bit addressing capability (32+12). But NX bit is bit 63, so
>>> it gets truncated.
>> 
>> Yes. For (on-going) 32-bit PV guests running on the 64-bit Xen, I
>> guess we should fix the convenient optimization now?
> 
> Or we restrict 32b guests to the bottom 16 terabytes of memory. Please
> send me a machine for testing the patch :-)
> 
> Ian
> 

No, we don't :-) It cannot happen on the architecture implementations
that exist today. Maybe ASSERT() would be sufficient so that it can
remind us of the issues in years.

Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center

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