> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hollis Blanchard [mailto:hollis_blanch...@mentor.com] 
> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 12:23 AM
> To: Liu Yu-B13201
> Cc: k...@vger.kernel.org; kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org; ag...@suse.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kvm/e500v2: MMU optimization
> 
> >>
> >>      
> > Hi Hollis,
> >
> > Guest uses AS=1 and host uses AS=0,
> > so even guest uses the same TID with host, they're in 
> different space.
> >
> > Then why guest needs to care about host TID?
> >
> >    
> You're absolutely right, but this makes a couple key assumptions:
> 1. The guest doesn't try to use AS=1. This is already false in Linux, 
> because the udbg code uses an AS=1 mapping for the UART, but 
> this can be 
> configured out (with a small loss in functionality). In 
> non-Linux guests 
> the AS=0 restriction could be onerous.

We could map (guest AS, guest TID) to (shadow TID),
So that we still don't need to bother host.

> 2. A Book E MMU. If we participate in the host "MMU context" 
> allocation, 
> the guest -> host address space code could be generalized to include 
> e.g. an e600 guest on an e500 host, or vice versa.
> 

Hmm.. Not sure it's a real requirement.


Thanks,
Yu

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to