> From: Paul Durrant [mailto:paul.durr...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 4:58 PM > > > > > btw does this design consider the case where multiple ioreq servers > > may claim on same page? > > Yes it does and there are currently insufficient page types to allow any more > than a single > ioreq server to claim a type. My plan is that, in future, we can add a p2t > mapping table to > allow for more types and then introduce HVMMEM_ioreq_1, HVMMEM_ioreq_2, etc.
so these new types actually represent ioreq server ID, right? If yes I can then understand your earlier explanations. > > > For example, different usages may both > > want to capture write requests on the same set of pages (say XenGT > > selectively write-protects a subset of pages due to shadow GTT, while > > another agent wants to monitor all guest writes to any guest memory > > page). > > Monitoring is a different thing altogether. Emulation is costly and not > something you'd want > to use for that purpose. If you want to monitor writes then log-dirty already > exists for that > purpose. Agree. > > > > > Thanks > > Kevin > > I hope my explanation helped. I think things will be clearer once I've had > chance to actually > put together a design doc. and hack up a PoC (probably only for EPT at first). > Thanks for the help. Let's see whether we can have some solution ready for 4.7. :-) Thanks Kevin _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel