>>> On 26.10.18 at 13:24, <george.dun...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 10/26/2018 12:20 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 26.10.18 at 12:51, <george.dun...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> The basic solution involves having a xenheap virtual address mapping >>> area not tied to the physical layout of the memory. domheap and xenheap >>> memory would have to come from the same pool, but xenheap would need to >>> be mapped into the xenheap virtual memory region before being returned. >> >> Wouldn't this most easily be done by making alloc_xenheap_pages() >> call alloc_domheap_pages() and then vmap() the result? Of course >> we may need to grow the vmap area in that case. > > I couldn't answer that question without a lot more digging. :-) I'd > always assumed that the reason for the original reason for having the > xenheap direct-mapped on 32-bit was something to do with early-boot > allocation; if there is something tricky there, we'd need to > special-case the early-boot allocation somehow.
The reason for the split on 32-bit was simply the lack of sufficient VA space. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
