Carsten Otte wrote: > >> The address space and vcpu management are rather different from kvm's, >> however your approach is better and we'll want to move kvm in your >> direction rather than the other way round (specifically the tight vcpu >> <-> task coupling; mmu is more diffcult). > We have tried a file based approach for the cpus before too.
We'll want to keep a vcpu fd. If the vcpu is idle we'll be asleep in poll() or the like, and we need some kind of wakeup mechanism. > > With regard to the memory, I do not quite understand why regular > pageable user space memory does'nt work with vt and svm. We would > definetly prefer to keep our virtual machine's memory pageable on > s390, therefore I guess we need some arch dependent plug that > allocates the memory. This would boil down to a regular anonymous > allocation on s390, and to specifically allocated memory on x86. I guess some of the difference stems from the fact that on x86, the Linux pagetables are actually the hardware pagetables. VT and SVM use a separate page table for the guest which cannot be shared with the host. This means that - we need to teach the Linux mm to look at shadow page tables when transferring dirty bits - when Linux wants to write protect a page, it has to modify the shadow page tables too (and flush the guest tlbs, which is again a bit different) - this means rmap has to be extended to include kvm I think that non-x86 have purely software page tables, maybe this make things easier. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
