Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Next steps with pv_ops for Xen

2007-12-05 Thread Keir Fraser
On 5/12/07 17:17, Derek Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually I'm not so sure now. Presumably you add VM_PFNMAP to make vm_normal_page() return NULL? But actually I would expect pte_pfn() to return max_mapnr because the mapped page is not a local page. And that should cause

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Next steps with pv_ops for Xen

2007-12-05 Thread Keir Fraser
On 5/12/07 20:15, Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In 2.6.18-xen the only two implementations of zap_pte are blktap_clear_pte and gntdev_clear_pte. Given a ptep with the grant-mapping bit set, could we determine which of these need calling and do the appropriate thing? Do we

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Next steps with pv_ops for Xen

2007-12-05 Thread Keir Fraser
On 5/12/07 14:30, Derek Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keir Fraser wrote: Is this patch to go into linux-2.6.18-xen.hg then? Yes, even if it doesn't fix the exact bug we're seeing here, I think it should go in. I've attached a version with my signed-off-by and a better commit comment

Re: [Xen-devel] [patch 14/33] xen: xen time implementation

2007-06-06 Thread Keir Fraser
On 6/6/07 12:00, Jan Beulich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the error across CPUS is +/- just a few microseconds at worst then having the clocksource clamp to no less than the last timestamp returned seems a reasonable fix. Time won't 'stop' for longer than the cross-CPU error, and that

Re: [PATCH 06/25] xen: Core Xen implementation

2007-04-27 Thread Keir Fraser
On 27/4/07 08:08, Jeremy Fitzhardinge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't you need a rmb() here then? The CPU could speculate reads (more occurrences) Is rmb() sufficient? It will stop a speculative read on the pending flag, but will it make sure the write has happened by then? Ie, is it a