Keir Fraser wrote:> On 23 Mar 2005, at 15:22, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
>
>> I like the idea of new macros. The other thing is that the current
>> shadow code has issues with supporting 32-bit unmodified guests on
>> x86_64 (e.g. VMX domain). For example, the following does not work,
>> and we need new definitions (e.g. l1_pgentry_32_t) for that purpose.
>> typedef struct { unsigned long l1_lo; } l1_pgentry_t;
>> typedef struct { unsigned long l2_lo; } l2_pgentry_t;
>> The linear page table does not work either, because the page table
>> entries are different (i.e. 4-byte vs. 8-byte). I think we need to
>> get the current shadow code working for 2-level page tables on both
>> x86 and x86_64 first, then extend it to support 3/4-level page
>> tables, probably in a sperate file?
>
> I suspect there may be a lot of commonality between the code for
> handling different pagteable arrangements (2 vs. 3 vs 4 level, and
> 4-byte vs 8-byte PTEs). Rather than duping the code for each case,
> maybe we can have one codebase with minimal ifdef''s that works
with
> the l_pgentry types, then perhaps gets compiled multiple times with
> different-size types and macros differently defined?
>
> As you say, it''s probably best to consider the best course of
action
> after we have x-type guest working on x-type host (for x =>
x86/32,PAE,x86/64).
One more thing, NX/XD support. The bit 63 really confuses Xen and has
impacts on pfn calculation routines/macros. I needed to disable that
feature on x86-64 xenolinux at this point.
Jun
>
> -- Keir
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Microsoft Mobile & Embedded DevCon 2005
Attend MEDC 2005 May 9-12 in Vegas. Learn more about the latest Windows
Embedded(r) & Windows Mobile(tm) platforms, applications & content.
Register
by 3/29 & save $300
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idh83&alloc_id149&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel