Carsten Otte wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: >> Why aren't memory slots common too? Only their number is different, >> while the implementation is the same. > Your approach makes the meaning of memory slot somewhat useless on > s390, if that one may be sparse and may be result of different > allocations: On x86, there has to be one memory slot per allocation, > versus on s390 there has to be exactly one memory slot with multiple > allocations behind.
No, a memory slot can span multiple backing stores. But it must be contiguous in both the host userspace and guest physical address spaces. > > For userspace that means, with your approach it has to do total > different memory setup for different archs _if_ it wants to use > multiple allocations and/or sparse: > - on x86 it does allocations to random userspace address, and > registers each of them as memory slot > - on s390 it does allocations to a specific address layout similar to > the guest, and registers only one memory slot for the whole thing > > With Izik's approach however, this is transparent to userspace: it has > multiple memory slots, one per allocation. Regardless of the CPU > architecture. You can do this with the current memory slots as well. Although I'm feeling that I misunderstood Izik's idea. I'll go talk to him. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
