Any conclusion on this thread ?
Xiantao
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
From d184d9b0a91ca674961000ed3d35b7fc25d29e03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiantao Zhang xiantao.zh...@intel.com
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:59:36 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: other archs should maintain memory mapping
also.
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
Any conclusion on this thread ?
Xiantao
Hi Xiantao,
Not that I am aware of, I suspect it's still pending in Avi's tree.
Cheers,
Jes
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
From d184d9b0a91ca674961000ed3d35b7fc25d29e03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiantao Zhang
Jes Sorensen wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Currently, use TARGET_I386 to comment out the mapping machanism
for other archs, but mapping machanism should be useful for other archs
to maintain guest's memory mapping.
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING
Avi Kivity wrote:
Jes Sorensen wrote:
+int destroy_region_works = 0;
Global name, prefix with kvm_. Does it actually need to be global?
Gone, now local to qemu-kvm-x86.c. I moved the initializer into
kvm_arch_create_context() instead.
The header depends on target_phys_addr_t, so it must
Avi Kivity wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
This is the one implementing the KVM_WANT_MAPPING change.
There is in fact a call to drop_mapping() outside any #ifdef (in
kvm_cpu_register_physical_memory()). I'm confused... maybe we should
make this code unconditional.
Hi Avi,
I don't follow this -
Avi Kivity wrote:
Jes Sorensen wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING or something, and
define it for I386 and IA64.
Hi,
This is the one implementing the KVM_WANT_MAPPING change.
Cheers,
Jes
There is in fact a call
Jes Sorensen wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Currently, use TARGET_I386 to comment out the mapping machanism
for other archs, but mapping machanism should be useful for other archs
to maintain guest's memory mapping.
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING
Avi Kivity wrote:
Jes Sorensen wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING or something, and
define it for I386 and IA64.
Hi,
This is the one implementing the KVM_WANT_MAPPING change.
Cheers,
Jes
There is in fact a call
Avi == Avi Kivity a...@redhat.com writes:
Avi Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
From d184d9b0a91ca674961000ed3d35b7fc25d29e03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001 From: Xiantao Zhang xiantao.zh...@intel.com Date: Tue, 28
Apr 2009 16:59:36 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: other archs
should maintain memory mapping
Avi Kivity wrote:
Currently, use TARGET_I386 to comment out the mapping machanism
for other archs, but mapping machanism should be useful for other archs
to maintain guest's memory mapping.
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING or something, and
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING or something, and
define it for I386 and IA64.
Hi,
This is the one implementing the KVM_WANT_MAPPING change.
Cheers,
Jes
Introduce KVM_WANT_MAPPING define to switch on mapping code,
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hollis, does this work for you?
If now, you can add a new define KVM_WANT_MAPPING or something, and
define it for I386 and IA64.
Hi,
This is the one implementing the KVM_WANT_MAPPING change.
Cheers,
Jes
Introduce KVM_WANT_MAPPING define to switch on mapping code,
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
From d184d9b0a91ca674961000ed3d35b7fc25d29e03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiantao Zhang xiantao.zh...@intel.com
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:59:36 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: other archs should maintain memory mapping also.
Currently, use TARGET_I386 to comment out
From d184d9b0a91ca674961000ed3d35b7fc25d29e03 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiantao Zhang xiantao.zh...@intel.com
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:59:36 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: other archs should maintain memory mapping also.
Currently, use TARGET_I386 to comment out the mapping machanism
for
14 matches
Mail list logo
