similar to: [PATCH 1/6] i386 virtualization - Fix uml build

The patch below fixes the recent UML compilation failure in -rc5-mm1 without making the UML build reach further into the i386 headers. It splits the i386 ptrace.h and system.h into UML-usable and UML-unusable pieces. The string "abi" is in there because I did ptrace.h first, and that involves separating the ptrace ABI stuff from everything else (if pt_regs is not considered part of

The patch below fixes the recent UML compilation failure in -rc5-mm1 without making the UML build reach further into the i386 headers. It splits the i386 ptrace.h and system.h into UML-usable and UML-unusable pieces. The string "abi" is in there because I did ptrace.h first, and that involves separating the ptrace ABI stuff from everything else (if pt_regs is not considered part of

Chris Wright wrote: >* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote: > > >>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this >> >> > >Yes. > > > >>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other >>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself >>must have live segments

Chris Wright wrote: >* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote: > > >>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this >> >> > >Yes. > > > >>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other >>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself >>must have live segments

This round attempts to conclude all of the LDT related cleanup with some finally nice looking LDT code, fixes for the UML build, a bugfix for really rather nasty kprobes problems, and the basic framework for an LDT test suite. It is really rather unfortunate that this code is so difficult to test, even with DOSemu and Wine, there are still very nasty corner cases here - anyone want an iret to

This round attempts to conclude all of the LDT related cleanup with some finally nice looking LDT code, fixes for the UML build, a bugfix for really rather nasty kprobes problems, and the basic framework for an LDT test suite. It is really rather unfortunate that this code is so difficult to test, even with DOSemu and Wine, there are still very nasty corner cases here - anyone want an iret to

Is there any real use in having a ctor/dtor for the pgd cache? Given that all pgd allocation happens via pgd_alloc/pgd_free, why not just fold the [cd]tor in? I'm asking because Xen wants pgd[3] to be unshared in the PAE case, and it looks to me like the easiest way to handle that is by making pgd_alloc/free pv-ops and doing the appropriate thing in the Xen code. Would need to sort out the

Is there any real use in having a ctor/dtor for the pgd cache? Given that all pgd allocation happens via pgd_alloc/pgd_free, why not just fold the [cd]tor in? I'm asking because Xen wants pgd[3] to be unshared in the PAE case, and it looks to me like the easiest way to handle that is by making pgd_alloc/free pv-ops and doing the appropriate thing in the Xen code. Would need to sort out the

Hooks are provided for the mach-XXX subarchitecture at the time prior to a page being used as a page table at all levels, for PAE and non-PAE kernels. Note that in PAE mode, multiple PDP roots may exist on the same page with other data, so the root must be shadowed instead. This is not a performance issue, since PAE only uses 4 top level PDPEs. The hooks are: SetPagePTE(ppn) - indicates that a

Hooks are provided for the mach-XXX subarchitecture at the time prior to a page being used as a page table at all levels, for PAE and non-PAE kernels. Note that in PAE mode, multiple PDP roots may exist on the same page with other data, so the root must be shadowed instead. This is not a performance issue, since PAE only uses 4 top level PDPEs. The hooks are: SetPagePTE(ppn) - indicates that a

Unlike full virtualization in which the virtual machine provides the same platform interface as running natively on the hardware, paravirtualization requires modification to the guest operating system to work with the platform interface provided by the hypervisor. Xen was designed with performance in mind. Calls to the hypervisor are minimized, batched if necessary, and non-critical codepaths

I'm wondering what the best way of building a UML image is; I tried the following based on documents I found on the web for FC2 mkdir -p $T/etc $T/dev $T/proc $T/sys $T/var/tmp $T/var/cache/yum \ $T/var/lock/rpm $T/var/cache/yum/update/headers \ $T/var/cache/yum/update/packages touch $T/etc/fstab mknod $T/dev/null c 1 3 chmod 666 $T/dev/null mount --bind /proc

Hi list! What''s the correct way to solve this problem? When you select "Xen-compatible" subarchitecture most of the drivers (network,scsi,etc) disappear from the menuconfig.. Currently linux-2.6-xen.hg repository is unusable (as is).. for dom0 and domU also. -- Pasi Kärkkäinen ^ . .

Hello list, I'd like to know if people use UML tool to analyze and/or document LLVM/Clang. I use StarUML. It's free and very good though it's free. But I consider using a commercial program. Because the organization I belong is willing to support for this. I don't think I will use these tools to write code. I think I will use these to do a documentation and analyze code. So the

Hi Sean Silva, Maybe I am the only one who is trying to use UML. In my team, I am also the only one who draws UML diagrams. I expected there be someone who use UML like me. But it's maybe not as your opinion. Maybe doxygen is enough for majority of people. Thanks for your reply. Sincerely Journeyer J. Joh 2012/12/25 Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu>: > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Journeyer J. Joh <oosaprogrammer at gmail.com> wrote: > Do you use one of these tools? If so let me know your experience. > And I don't believe people use these to generate code for LLVM/Clang. I personally don't use any tool like that. My impression is that most developers here do not use any kind of UML code generation; I could, of course,

Add an accessor function for getting the per-CPU gdt. Callee must already have the CPU. Patch-base: 2.6.13-rc5-mm1 Patch-keys: i386 desc xen Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> Index: linux-2.6.13/include/asm-i386/desc.h =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.13.orig/include/asm-i386/desc.h 2005-08-09 20:17:21.000000000 -0700 +++

Add an accessor function for getting the per-CPU gdt. Callee must already have the CPU. Patch-base: 2.6.13-rc5-mm1 Patch-keys: i386 desc xen Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> Index: linux-2.6.13/include/asm-i386/desc.h =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.13.orig/include/asm-i386/desc.h 2005-08-09 20:17:21.000000000 -0700 +++

In Rolling with Ruby on Rails tutorial - http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2005/01/20/rails.html - I saw that to introduce a new element to my domain, I needed to define it in a table, generate a model element with a similar name and the class would autoamtically take the attributes from the table definition. Is it possible to do this in the other direction... i.e to take the class diagram

Any body here has used ruby-uml from http://ruby-uml.rubyforge.org/ ?? I dont know how to use it, would you mind to share your experience on it? OR Have you found plug-in or gem for generating application code like controllers, models, views to sequence diagram ? I have tried RailRoad, but it can not create sequence diagram, only class diagram for controllers and models. Thank You for your