On 19.07.2019 14:25, Paul Durrant wrote:
When commit 3f8f1228 "x86/mm: add HYPERVISOR_memory_op to acquire guest
resources" introduced the concept of directly mapping some guest resources,
it was envisaged that the memory for some resources associated with a guest
may not actually be assigned to
On 19/07/2019 14:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.07.2019 14:41, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 19/07/2019 13:25, Paul Durrant wrote:
>>> When commit 3f8f1228 "x86/mm: add HYPERVISOR_memory_op to acquire guest
>>> resources" introduced the concept of directly mapping some guest resources,
>>> it was
On 19.07.2019 14:41, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 19/07/2019 13:25, Paul Durrant wrote:
>> When commit 3f8f1228 "x86/mm: add HYPERVISOR_memory_op to acquire guest
>> resources" introduced the concept of directly mapping some guest resources,
>> it was envisaged that the memory for some resources
On 19/07/2019 13:25, Paul Durrant wrote:
> When commit 3f8f1228 "x86/mm: add HYPERVISOR_memory_op to acquire guest
> resources" introduced the concept of directly mapping some guest resources,
> it was envisaged that the memory for some resources associated with a guest
> may not actually be
When commit 3f8f1228 "x86/mm: add HYPERVISOR_memory_op to acquire guest
resources" introduced the concept of directly mapping some guest resources,
it was envisaged that the memory for some resources associated with a guest
may not actually be assigned to that guest, specifically the IOREQ server
