[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] question about machine-to-physic table and phy-to-machine table
Thank you for your reply in the paravirt case, guestos maintain its own mfn which need m2p and p2m ,is it right? I am confused about how does guestOS maintain its virt-to-physic and physic-to-mach mapping ,in the linux ,there is only v2p mapping, how does guestOS maintain its p2m mapping ,and when a virt address is put into a mmu, does cpu hardware convert virt-addr into machine address or guest's phyiscal address?I am confused about the meaning and function of machine-to-physic addressit *is* confusing, admittedly. in my understanding, one reaseon for 'm2p'/'p2m' being used is that guest operating systems, most prominently linux, have always been using 'pfn' for 'page frame number' and the like when referring to 'physical' memory. now you need some kind of distinction in the paravirtual guest case, because those oses will deal with both. I am confused about it could you help me Thanks in advance that host memory becoming a non-contiguous, non-physical one clearly doesn't justify to substitute the names all across the kernel codebase. equally, you could not name it virtual or similar in the vmm, because the term 'virtual' has obviously been allocated elsewhere. so host memory became 'machine' memory. in a different universe, it might have rather been the actual 'physical' one. or 'host' memory. virtual machine memory got a 'p' like in both 'pseudo-physical' and/or 'pfn' and i suppose turned for a significant number of people into 'physical' at some point. which is largely misleading. regards, daniel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |