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] Re: [PATCH 3/5] cpu-common: Have a ram_addr_t of uint64

To: Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] cpu-common: Have a ram_addr_t of uint64 with Xen.
From: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 20:42:57 +0100
Cc: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, QEMU-devel <qemu-devel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 12:44:16 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=q5rAacYuIktPr68a7F7H3KbbjKEey/zhlUmAJVEbTo4=; b=R6jAkKP5wS8ufOCDWxJWZZFb8d4lbAR/JHp8pADFMchkAlErc+27FeHmo3i9xErI3U bK6myY8ZnLMwA3OA6aHsdT0Dv6Flzt/7EBQ1bZPDiq2gdQVZFHkxOmQkFsc1koiwqgTU 8kXGev1/DpYm7uwrpe+2XYGbvTVhXWVPmeP+A=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAJJyHjKY7YDV-Uoi4YurQU5WGBvBkx3MewLffryyz6RTQ+XcNA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <1310740376-13323-1-git-send-email-anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx> <1310740376-13323-4-git-send-email-anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx> <AB9930DB-35FC-4518-A9BA-25146660A487@xxxxxxx> <CAJJyHjKY7YDV-Uoi4YurQU5WGBvBkx3MewLffryyz6RTQ+XcNA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 15:46, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 13:30, Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 15.07.2011, at 16:32, Anthony Perard wrote:
>>> In Xen case, memory can be bigger than the host memory. that mean a
>>> 32bits host (and QEMU) should be able to handle a RAM address of 64bits.
>>> Signed-off-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> cpu-common.h |    8 ++++++++
>>> exec.c       |    9 +++++----
>>> xen-all.c    |    2 +-
>>> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>> diff --git a/cpu-common.h b/cpu-common.h
>>> index e4fcded..e1b40fe 100644
>>> --- a/cpu-common.h
>>> +++ b/cpu-common.h
>>> @@ -27,7 +27,15 @@ enum device_endian {
>>> };
>>> /* address in the RAM (different from a physical address) */
>>> typedef unsigned long ram_addr_t;
>> Do we really want to depend this on _BACKEND? ram_addr_t is target 
>> dependent, no?
> :(, indeed, it's seams to be target dependent, I did not check that
> carefully enough. So CONFIG_XEN is enough.

Actually, this does not work because it is used in libhw64 (like

So I am thinking about eithier introduce a new config variable in
./configure (ram_addr_bits), or just have

So, libhw64 with xen activated will be compiled with a ram_addr of
64b, and the libhw32 will stay with a "unsigned long".

Anthony PERARD

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>