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

Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, John Byrne <john.l.byrne@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:16:07 +0000
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:16:22 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <455835B7.76E4.0078.0@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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AccG+/f1NmTd8nLvEduYAQANk04WTA==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620
On 13/11/06 8:07 am, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> There was a bug in my previous patch. (There's nothing like trying to
>> get to sleep and realizing you've screwed up.) The x86 pae
>> PHYSICAL_PAGE_MASK I defined was incorrect because PAGE_MASK was only a
>> long. I hope I haven't done anything else wrong.
> 
> I don't think this is correct - machine_to_phys() translates a machine address
> to a physical one, and in that translation the upper bits matter only as much
> as mfn_to_pfn() should return an invalid indicator if any of them is set. In
> turn,
> it should be the caller's responsibility to make sure the NX bit (and any
> potential
> other one being set beyond bit 52) gets masked off *before* calling this
> function. (Specifically, the preserving of the lower bits is to properly
> translate
> a non-page aligned address, not to preserve attribute bits read from a page
> table entry).

Yes, we should keep the old machine_to_phys() definition and rename John's
new version as pte_machine_to_phys(). The latter should be used in all
contexts where machine_to_phys() currently operates on a pte (that's most of
its uses, actually). This is a worthwhile cleanup and clarification. Could
you respin the patch, John?

 Thanks,
 Keir



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