Re: [Xen-devel] Re: mem-event interface

[Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 16:45 +0100 on 27 Jun (1277657152), Grzegorz Milos wrote:
> Well, the trouble is what do units you express the ranges in. In pfns
> belonging to a given guest, or in mfns? Either way memory sharing
> would use <0 - max_{p,m}fn> rangeset most of the time. Similarly for
> teh pager (I believe). Bryan, could you comment on XenAccess? I guess
> rangesets would be useful there the most.

Guest-physical addresses (i.e. GFNs but at byte granularity), I
think.  The hypercall interface handles all HVM memory in GFN-space, so
I think this should be no exception. 

Cheers,

Tim.

> I certainly agree that we will have to swallow some complexity in Xen,
> to make the interface efficient. Some filters will have to live in
> Xen, in order not to generate unnecessarily large rate of no-op
> events.
> 
> Thanks
> Gregor

-- 
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)

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