Re: [Xen-devel] xen_phys_start for 32b

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/01/2009 22:19, "Cihula, Joseph" <joseph.cihula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> It's not used for domheap either. In fact it's not really used at all. Hence
>> encompassing it within xenheap_phys_start to xenheap_phys_end works okay.
>> 
> 
> But shouldn't [xenheap_phys_start, xenheap_phys_end] represent all of the
> memory that the hypervisor "owns" and which must be protected from even
> privileged domain writes (modulo the real mode/trampoline code, which has its
> own variables that represent its range)?  While it may be "OK" on 32b systems,
> it is not "logically correct" and does not match 64b systems (where this low
> memory is not so protected).  Would it break anything to set
> xenheap_phys_start to __pa(&_start) for 32b builds?

So what issue does this fix for you?

 -- Keir



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