[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] xen: Introduce "gpaddr_bits" field to XEN_SYSCTL_physinfo
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Oleksandr <olekstysh@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 19:05:44 +0300
- Cc: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@xxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@xxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>, Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 16:05:56 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 16.09.21 18:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
Hi Jan
On 16.09.2021 17:43, Oleksandr wrote:
On 16.09.21 17:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.09.2021 20:18, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote:
@@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ struct xen_sysctl_physinfo {
uint64_aligned_t outstanding_pages;
uint64_aligned_t max_mfn; /* Largest possible MFN on this host */
uint32_t hw_cap[8];
+ uint32_t gpaddr_bits;
};
Please make trailing padding explicit. I wonder whether this needs
to be a 32-bit field: I expect we would need a full new ABI by the
time we might reach 256 address bits. Otoh e.g. threads_per_core is
pretty certainly oversized as well ...
I take it, this is a suggestion to make the field uint8_t and add
uint8_t pad[7] after?
I view this as a viable option at least.
I got it, sounds reasonable.
Jan
--
Regards,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko
|
