WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Xen

xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Xen-devel] Question on save/restore mfn canonicalization

To: Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andreslc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John Levon <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Question on save/restore mfn canonicalization
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2007年9月29日 07:46:30 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: 2007年9月28日 23:42:29 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <46FD4E05.60600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcgCZHc0tabKPG5XEdyKkQAWy6hiGQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Question on save/restore mfn canonicalization
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618
Yeah, it's just the way it got written long ago. It isn't as nice as it
could be, but it can't be changed now.
 -- Keir
On 28/9/07 19:55, "Andres Lagar-Cavilla" <andreslc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well, when you're in school you don't have to care about breaking ABI's :)
> So, the answer is then "no particular reason"?
> Andres
> John Levon wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:25:28PM -0400, Andres Lagar-Cavilla wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> While exploring the paravirt save/restore code path, I noted a
>>> (seemingly) lack of consistency between where/who canonicalizes
>>> something and who un-canonicalizes. For example, the guest kernel
>>> canonicalizes the store and console mfn's in pre_suspend, but
>>> xc_domain_restore uncanonicalizes them before scheduling back the
>>> restored guest.
>>> The question is if there is a mandatory reason for this, or is just the
>>> way the code was written. Can I, e.g, fill the
>>> pfn_to_mfn_frame_list(_list) entries from "outside" and remove that code
>>> from post_suspend, or will something break?
>>> 
>> 
>> You'll break the ABI. I don't know of a reason why it's so inconsistent.
>> 
>> regards
>> john
>> 
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel 
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date: RE: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.1.1 RC2 testing report. -- 1 Blocked issue. , You, Yongkang
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 3.1.1 RC2 testing report. -- 1 Blocked issue. , Keir Fraser
Previous by Thread: Re: [Xen-devel] Question on save/restore mfn canonicalization , Andres Lagar-Cavilla
Next by Thread: [Xen-devel] permit_access functionality , Jayant Mangalampalli
Indexes: [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]

Copyright ©, Citrix Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Legal and Privacy
Citrix This site is hosted by Citrix

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /