WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 		  
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: [Xen-devel] [patch] nx bit shouldn't get set when disabled

from [Keir Fraser] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: "Scott Parish" <srparish@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [patch] nx bit shouldn't get set when disabled
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 20:56:32 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 19:59:27 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050608180615.GF14747@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D37200173042FECD1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050608180615.GF14747@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

On 8 Jun 2005, at 19:06, Scott Parish wrote:


How does the attached patch look?

sRp
Why does x86_64 get pte_mfn, but not pae i386? I think pci-dma.c should probably be shared between i386 and x86/64. Why the extra mask ops with __supported_pte_mask? Native x86/64 builds obviously don't need them... 

 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: [Xen-devel] [Fwd: RE: [Fwd: x86_64 - Kernel BUG at hypervisor:53]], Scott Parish
Next by Date:  Re: [Xen-devel] [patch] nx bit shouldn't get set when disabled, Scott Parish
Previous by Thread:  [Xen-devel] [patch] nx bit shouldn't get set when disabled, Scott Parish
Next by Thread:  Re: [Xen-devel] [patch] nx bit shouldn't get set when disabled, Scott Parish
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]
 
   

Copyright , Citrix Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Legal and Privacy