Le Lundi 19 Juin 2006 15:35, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) a écrit :
On this point VTi may have a real advantage over
paravirtualization.
Could you explain further?
Yes.
The virtualization handler has the opcode in GR25.
I don't know the amount of PAL code involved,
Le Mardi 13 Juin 2006 22:11, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) a écrit :
After reading some Xen/ia64 source, I think we'd better not
to use vpsr.ic for
fast hypercall: it has some interractions with vpsr.ic flag!
I'd vote for creating a new paravirtualized register: xen_break (or
Le Mercredi 14 Juin 2006 05:02, Isaku Yamahata a écrit :
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 01:11:04PM -0700, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort
Collins) wrote:
There are two purposes of paravirtualization: one is correctness
and the other is performance. If fully virtualized vDSO
works properly and
I have a question on priv_handle_op().
I changed the function so that xen/ia64 reflects itlb miss
to a domain
when xen/ia64 fails to read a bundle.
Xen/ia64 reflected dtlb miss before my change.
Is it correct to reflect dtlb miss?
No this was just a hack that worked. It does need
Le Mardi 13 Juin 2006 02:36, Tian, Kevin a écrit :
Recently we kept seeing intermittent domU creation failure after
creating
VTI domain. After some debug, we found it caused by following
changeset:
changeset: 10238:b27139d8c1e1
user:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
date:Sat Jun 03
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 09:49:17PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 08:36 +0800, Tian, Kevin wrote:
That's the real problem, though we're not sure why this phenomenon is
easier to be reproduced after creating VTI domain. Quick/easy solution
can be to roll back above
From: Isaku Yamahata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2006年6月13日 19:13
There are the following choices for right fix, I think.
A. use hypercall instead of hyperprivop.
B. introduce new flag for hyperprivop instread VPSR.ic as Tristan
proposed.
C. use one of itr to map vDSO.
D. abondan vDSO
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 01:11:04PM -0700, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort
Collins) wrote:
There are two purposes of paravirtualization: one is correctness
and the other is performance. If fully virtualized vDSO
works properly and there's no impact on performance, it
shouldn't be
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 08:36 +0800, Tian, Kevin wrote:
That's the real problem, though we're not sure why this phenomenon is
easier to be reproduced after creating VTI domain. Quick/easy solution
can be to roll back above changeset to ensure tree stability first, and
then
community needs to
