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/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: update machine_to_phys_order on resume

To: <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>,"Keir Fraser" <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>, "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, <keir@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: update machine_to_phys_order on resume
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:05:49 +0100
Cc: olaf@xxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:06:43 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CA46441A.1E019%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4E20873F020000780007307B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CA46441A.1E019%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> On 15.07.11 at 20:23, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 15/07/2011 18:30, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Actually, one more thought: What's the purpose of this hypercall if
>> it is set in stone what values it ought to return? Isn't a guest using
>> it (supposed to be) advertising that it can deal with the values being
>> variable (and it was just overlooked so far that this doesn't only
>> include varying values from boot to boot, but also migration)? Or in
>> other words, if we found a need to relocate the M2P table or grow
>> its static maximum size, it would be impossible to migrate guests
>> from an old to a new hypervisor.
> Fair point. There has to be a static fallback set of return values for old
> guests.

Hmm, in my reading the two sentences sort of contradict each other.
That is, I'm not certain what route we want to go here: Keep things
the way they are after 23706:3dd399873c9e, and introduce a
completely new discovery mechanism if we find it necessary to change
the M2P table's location and/or size, including a mechanism for a guest
to announce it's capable of dealing with that? If so, I think we ought
to add a comment to the hypercall implementation documenting that
its return values must not be changed (and why).


Xen-devel mailing list