On 01.10.2021 13:22, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 07:59 +0200 on 01 Oct (1633075173), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 27.09.2021 22:25, Tim Deegan wrote:
>>> At 13:31 +0200 on 24 Sep (1632490304), Jan Beulich wrote:
The 2M logic also first checks _PAGE_PRESENT (and _PAGE_PSE), while
the 4k logic
At 07:59 +0200 on 01 Oct (1633075173), Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 27.09.2021 22:25, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > At 13:31 +0200 on 24 Sep (1632490304), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> The 2M logic also first checks _PAGE_PRESENT (and _PAGE_PSE), while
> >> the 4k logic appears to infer that the old page was present
On 27.09.2021 22:25, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 13:31 +0200 on 24 Sep (1632490304), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The 2M logic also first checks _PAGE_PRESENT (and _PAGE_PSE), while
>> the 4k logic appears to infer that the old page was present from
>> p2m_is_{valid,grant}().
>
> I think the p2m_type check
On 27.09.2021 22:25, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 13:31 +0200 on 24 Sep (1632490304), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> I'm afraid you're still my best guess to hopefully get an insight
>> on issues like this one.
>
> I'm now very rusty on all this but I'll do my best! I suspect I'll
> just be following you
Hi,
At 13:31 +0200 on 24 Sep (1632490304), Jan Beulich wrote:
> I'm afraid you're still my best guess to hopefully get an insight
> on issues like this one.
I'm now very rusty on all this but I'll do my best! I suspect I'll
just be following you through the code.
> While doing IOMMU superpage
Tim,
I'm afraid you're still my best guess to hopefully get an insight
on issues like this one.
While doing IOMMU superpage work I was, just in the background,
considering in how far the superpage re-coalescing to be used there
couldn't be re-used for P2M / EPT / NPT. Which got me to think about
