On Jan 10, 2007, at 12:43 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote:

On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 12:24 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote:

We have currently have three page allocators. The first is PPC-
and it includes the Xen image, RTAS, and our copy of the Open
device tree.

More precisely, it is OF-specific and exists because we cannot trust
the "claim" OF-method, so really it is more of a workaround.

You say we can't trust "claim",
hmm, "trust" implies a lot, I guess...

but a) we trust "available" properties,

We trust "available" to have correct information but not to be complete, or up to date.

and b) we trust the return code from "claim".

Excellent point, we trust the "claim" is implemented and that it _may_ object if the address conflicts. If "claim" is not implemented _at_all_ then the current code would interpret it as rejecting all addresses and we would be screwed.

So the only thing you could mean is that we don't trust that "claims"
will be reflected in the "available" properties. Is that what you mean?
Where have we seen that?

- does not implement "available", but may in the next release (so I'm told)
 - "claim" will tell you only about PIBS conflicts
- will not tell you about conflicts with other claims or loaded images
- does implement, but does not update "available", though recent resions might
 - "claim" will only tell you about conflicts its self
- will not tell you about conflicts with other claims or loaded images

GFW: does everything as spec'ed
Apple: does everything as spec'ed


Xen-ppc-devel mailing list

Reply via email to