Hi David,
On 19/05/15 16:39, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 14/05/15 18:01, Julien Grall wrote:
>> The hypercall interface (as well as the toolstack) is always using 4KB
>> page granularity. When the toolstack is asking for mapping a series of
>> guest PFN in a batch, it expects to have the page map
Hi David,
On 19/05/15 16:39, David Vrabel wrote:
On 14/05/15 18:01, Julien Grall wrote:
The hypercall interface (as well as the toolstack) is always using 4KB
page granularity. When the toolstack is asking for mapping a series of
guest PFN in a batch, it expects to have the page map
On 14/05/15 18:01, Julien Grall wrote:
> The hypercall interface (as well as the toolstack) is always using 4KB
> page granularity. When the toolstack is asking for mapping a series of
> guest PFN in a batch, it expects to have the page map contiguously in
> its virtual memory.
>
> When Linux is
On 14/05/15 18:01, Julien Grall wrote:
The hypercall interface (as well as the toolstack) is always using 4KB
page granularity. When the toolstack is asking for mapping a series of
guest PFN in a batch, it expects to have the page map contiguously in
its virtual memory.
When Linux is using
The hypercall interface (as well as the toolstack) is always using 4KB
page granularity. When the toolstack is asking for mapping a series of
guest PFN in a batch, it expects to have the page map contiguously in
its virtual memory.
When Linux is using 64KB page granularity, the privcmd driver
The hypercall interface (as well as the toolstack) is always using 4KB
page granularity. When the toolstack is asking for mapping a series of
guest PFN in a batch, it expects to have the page map contiguously in
its virtual memory.
When Linux is using 64KB page granularity, the privcmd driver
6 matches
Mail list logo
