Hi, Trying to boot domain0 with dom0_shadow=1 fails ... Is this supposed to work? Gerd _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Hi,> Is this supposed to work?Oh, and btw, trying to use the "new" shadow code for 32bit non-pae doesn''t even compile. Is nobody testing that? Wasn''t the plan to use the new code everythere some day? What is the status of that? cheers, Gerd --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile Wed Oct 19 10:53:00 2005 +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile Fri Oct 21 16:24:46 2005 @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ ifneq ($(pae),n) OBJS += shadow.o shadow_public.o # x86_32p: new code else - OBJS += shadow32.o # x86_32: old code + OBJS += shadow.o shadow_public.o # x86_32: new code +# OBJS += shadow32.o # x86_32: old code endif endif _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Gerd Knorr wrote:> Hi, > >> Is this supposed to work? > > Oh, and btw, trying to use the "new" shadow code for 32bit non-pae > doesn''t even compile. Is nobody testing that? Wasn''t the plan to use > the new code everythere some day? What is the status of that?Gerd, Hi We''ve been working on shadow.c to get/restore log-dirty mode for PAE and x86_64. It''s basically start working, and doing more tests. The plan is to support 3-level and 4-level in shadow.c for now (for 3.0), and merge 2-level to shadow.c.> > cheers, > > Gerd > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile Wed Oct 19 10:53:00 2005 > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile Fri Oct 21 16:24:46 2005 > @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ > ifneq ($(pae),n) > OBJS += shadow.o shadow_public.o # x86_32p: new code > else > - OBJS += shadow32.o # x86_32: old code > + OBJS += shadow.o shadow_public.o # x86_32: new code > +# OBJS += shadow32.o # x86_32: old code > endif > endif > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-develJun --- Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> > Is this supposed to work?I wouldn''t rely on dom0_shadow=1 working at any moment in time as its used for development purposes rather than production. It''s usually pretty easy to fix.> Oh, and btw, trying to use the "new" shadow code for 32bit > non-pae doesn''t even compile. Is nobody testing that? > Wasn''t the plan to use the new code everythere some day? > What is the status of that?Yep that''s the plan. The Intel folks are currently adding guest ref count log dirty mode to shadow.c, which may well fix it as a side effect. As soon as we have the same level of confidence in shadow.c that we do in shadow32.c we''ll switch over for 32b non-pae builds too. Ian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel