Hello guys,
Is there any available resource that explains how user-mode-linux maps the
pages of a task in UML to the host kernel?
In my UML, I modified a task's page table when forking it. Then I ran into
a situation where the page fault happens over and over again for the same
address in the for
e one special mapping at the head of its vma list.
Thanks.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 12:52 PM, richard -rw- weinberger <
richard.weinber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Terry Hsu wrote:
> > Is there any available resource that explains how user-mode-linux maps
re of its parent task. So
the parent task's vm areas are shared (as long as VM_DONTCOPY is not set)
among some of its child tasks.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:04 AM, richard -rw- weinberger <
richard.weinber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Terry Hsu wrote:
>
int_mm_rss_stat] mm->rss_stat.count[2] = 0
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:19 PM, richard -rw- weinberger <
richard.weinber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Terry Hsu wrote:
> > The page fault loop for the same address happens in my UML. But for both
> my
&g
at how the special mapping works with the host kernel. I
think this might lead me to the solution of my problem. It sounds like the
special mapping is not installed correctly so that the UML was not able to
fix the fault.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Terry Hsu wrote:
> In the unmodified kern
when/where the UML writes the to be fixed address into SKAS
stub so I can fix the problem accordingly. I think my UML is using the
wrong SKAS stub to fixed the fault...
Thanks!
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Terry Hsu wrote:
> okay so I looked into the faultinfo structure and was able to obt
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Terry Hsu wrote:
> okay so I looked into the faultinfo structure and was able to obtain the
> faulting address, error code, and trap number(?). From my understanding the
> error code is the bottom 3 bits of the exception code. But I see error c
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Richard RW. Weinberger <
rich...@sigma-star.at> wrote:
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> >
> >
> > > UML development mostly stopped in favor to KVM.
> >
> >
> > so you mean to say that KVM is preferable to UML?
> > (I Guess it may depend on the situation?)
>
> KV
Great to know this, thanks for keeping it up!
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:15 PM, richard -rw- weinberger <
richard.weinber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Terry Hsu wrote:
> > Indeed, I am developing some functions for the virtual memory subsystem
>
