> From: George Dunlap > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 8:55 PM > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:49 PM, George Dunlap > <george.dun...@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > If RMRRs almost always happen up above 2G, for example, then a simple > > solution that wouldn't require too much work would be to make sure > > that the PCI MMIO hole we specify to libxc and to qemu-upstream is big > > enough to include all RMRRs. That would satisfy the libxc and qemu > > requirements. > > > > If we then store specific RMRRs we want included in xenstore, > > hvmloader can put them in the e820 map, and that would satisfy the > > hvmloader requirement. > > An alternate thing to do here would be to "properly" fix the > qemu-upstream problem, by making a way for hvmloader to communicate > changes in the gpfn layout to qemu. > > Then hvmloader could do the work of moving memory under RMRRs to > higher memory; and libxc wouldn't need to be involved at all. > > I think it would also fix our long-standing issues with assigning PCI > devices to qemu-upstream guests, which up until now have only been > worked around. >
could you elaborate a bit for that long-standing issue? Thanks Kevin _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
