[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1] xen/arm: Do not allocate pte entries for MAP_SMALL_PAGES
Hi Ian, On 03/03/2015 10:27, Ian Campbell wrote: On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 13:28 +0530, Vijay Kilari wrote:On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 24/02/15 10:26, Ian Campbell wrote:On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 09:38 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:Hi Ian, On 24/02/2015 09:31, Ian Campbell wrote:On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 13:03 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:+ { + pte = mfn_to_xen_entry(mfn, (ai & 0xffff));Please introduce a new macro for the mask.Better would be a pte_foo accessor, similar (if not identical) to x86's pte_get_flags. So pte_get_flags(ai) or so.I'm not able to find a such function in x86. Did you intend to mean pte_flags_to_cacheattr?It's actually get_pte_flags.In another side, using PTE_PRESENT would require to introduce a PAGE_AVAIL0 (or smth similar).Why?If we have only a bit PTE_PRESENT, how do you define MAP_SMALL_PAGES?MAP_SMALL_PAGES is already defined as WRITE_ALLOC which occupies lower 3 bits what is need for PAGE_AVAIL0? Below definitions should suffice?I think so. You don't need the ()s around DEV_* and WRITE_ALLOC etc in the PAGE_* definitions. I'm not sure to follow here. Do you think MAP_SMALL_PAGES should be defined as WRITE_ALLOC? A comment on the format of the bit packing done here would also be useful e.g. "16: present\n2:0: pte attributes field" in a little block comment above this stuff, below the DEV_* stuff. PAGE_PRESENT might be more in keepign that PTE_PRESENT, since this isn't a PTE bit pattern. Sounds good to me. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |