[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xen-ia64-devel] Implementing both (was: Xen/ia64 - global or per VP VHPT)


  • To: "ipf-xen" <ipf-xen@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 16:34:12 -0700
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 02 May 2005 23:34:47 +0000
  • List-id: DIscussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcVPb3JXMihcD89IQYupUNJEM3YWVA==
  • Thread-topic: Implementing both (was: Xen/ia64 - global or per VP VHPT)

Thanks, Bert, for the good summary of issues.

> If everyone agrees that doing both
> implementations in the same source base is feasible and does 
> not adversely
> affect other stuff, then I have no objection to what you propose.

Let's start the feasibility discussion on a new base thread...

I am probably oversimplifying it, but I'm not sure it will be
that hard to support both approaches.  Domain0's VHPT is set
up at boot time.  When new domains are launched they should
specify whether they want to "share" Domain0's VHPT (global
VHPT) or have their own VHPT allocated (per-domain VHPT).
For now, the default for paravirt domains can be shared and
the default (or, if necessary, the ONLY choice) for VT domains
can be per-domain.

The choice (and the location of the physical IVA) becomes
part of the per-domain state.  At domain switch time, cr.iva
is changed as necessary.

Now everybody can commence shooting holes in my oversimplification :-)

Dan

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.