On 17.08.21 20:54, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Julien
On 17/08/2021 18:53, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Oleksandr,
On 10/08/2021 18:03, Oleksandr wrote:
On 10.08.21 19:28, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Julien.
On 09/08/2021 22:18, Oleksandr wrote:
On 09.08.21 23:45, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Julien
Hi Oleksandr,
On 09/08/2021 19:24, Oleksandr wrote:
On 09.08.21 18:42, Julien Grall wrote:
1. If IOMMU is enabled for Dom0 -> provide holes found in Host
DT as safe ranges
I would take into the account holes >= 1MB.
May I ask why 1MB?
Nothing special, just thinking to not bother with small regions
which would not be too useful overall, but could bloat resulting
reg property.
Anyway, I would be ok with any sizes.
I was more interesting with the reasoning behind your choice rather
than saying we want more.
I agree that we may want to skip smaller region. I am guess that an
high number of small regions will also increase the bookeeping in
Linux.
But I would probably suggest to align the safe region to a 2MB
(superpage for 4KB page granularity) just because the backend (or
even Xen) may be able to do some optimization there.
OK, agree regarding the alignment. But, what about the size? I
assume, it should be a multiple of 2MB.
I would say yes. In the documentation for the guest, I would just
write "64KB" to give us some flexibility to reduce the alignment/size
if we encounter platform where we can meet those limits (hopefully
there is none...).
Whoops, I meant cannot rather than can.
ok, makes sense, thank you for the clarification.
Cheers,
--
Regards,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko
