On 17/03/2020 13:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.03.2020 18:49, p...@xen.org wrote:
In auditing open-coded tests of PGC_xen_heap, I am unsure if offline_page()
needs to check for PGC_extra pages too.
"Extra" pages being the designated replacement for Xen heap ones,
I think it should. Then
On 17.03.2020 15:47, Paul Durrant wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jan Beulich
>> Sent: 17 March 2020 13:07
>>
>> On 10.03.2020 18:49, p...@xen.org wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pod.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pod.c
>>> @@ -749,8 +749,9 @@
On 10.03.2020 18:49, p...@xen.org wrote:
> In auditing open-coded tests of PGC_xen_heap, I am unsure if offline_page()
> needs to check for PGC_extra pages too.
"Extra" pages being the designated replacement for Xen heap ones,
I think it should. Then again the earlier
if ( (owner =
From: Paul Durrant
... to cover xenheap and PGC_extra pages.
PGC_extra pages are intended to hold data structures that are associated
with a domain and may be mapped by that domain. They should not be treated
as 'normal' guest pages (i.e. RAM or page tables). Hence, in many cases
where code
