RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch to merge vcpu.c

["Xu, Anthony" <anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Dan,

I haven't stress-tested my patch, my patch almost doesn't touch xeno code,
I am curious have you done the same stress-test on dom0 without my patch?
I think we'd better setup the infrastructure ( domU and VTdom up) first, then 
we will come back to make all this stable.

Thanks
Anthony

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) [mailto:dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx]
>Sent: 2005年9月14日 12:48
>To: Xu, Anthony
>Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch to merge vcpu.c
>
>Hi Anthony --
>
>I tried your patch.  It applies cleanly and compiles
>cleanly.  However, I am seeing problems when testing it.
>I run a script that builds linux ten times as
>a stress test.  During this test, twice, gcc has
>frozen or gotten into an infinite loop; I'm not
>really sure other than it continues to eat up CPU
>time and not make forward progress.  Other times
>building linux completes OK.
>
>Have you stress-tested the patch on your system?
>I would be curious whether you can reproduce it.
>I can send you my buildlinux script if you like.
>
>Dan
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Xu, Anthony [mailto:anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 6:28 AM
>> To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
>> Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] This is the first patch to
>> merge vcpu.c
>>
>> Dan,
>> This patch is based on ver 6723. And definitely I can boot
>> dom0 with this patch.
>>
>> Following things are done in this patch.
>> 1. Merge structure pt_reg.
>> 2. Though vcpu_info structure has been merged, non-vt domain
>> used pointer vcpu->vcpu_info->arch.privregs, and vt domain
>> used pointer vcpu->arch.arch_vmx.vpd, the value of these two
>> pointers are different, that means vt and non-vt domain still
>> use different privileged registers pages, in this case, we
>> can't merge vcpu.c, so I merged these two pointer, and put it
>> at vcpu->arch.privregs. vcpu->vcpu_info->arch.privregs and
>> vcpu->arch.arch_vmx.vpd  will not exist. Why put it at
>> vcpu->arch.privregs?  1. There will be one less pointer
>> unreferenced when accessing this privileged registers page.
>> 2. vcpu->vcpu_info can be accessed by guest, but guest can't
>> access privileged registers page through this address, guest
>> can access this privileged page only through another special
>> mapping. So there is no need to expose this pointer to guest
>> by putting it in vcpu->vcpu_info structure. All accesses to
>> this page is through VCPU(vcpu,y) macro,
>> 3. Merged following functions.
>>      Vcpu_set/get_(interruption control registers from cr16
>> to cr25), corresponding functions vmx_vcpu_set/get_*** will not exist.
>>      Vcpu->arch.arch_vmx.in_service[4] will not exist, we
>> will all use vcpu->arch.insvc[4]
>> 4. Cleaned up some unused structure members and codes.
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by Anthony Xu <Anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anthony
>>

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel