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-ia64-devel

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] RE: PATCH: get rid of dcr bit 63 trick

To: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>, <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Williamson, Alex (Linux Kernel Dev)" <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] RE: PATCH: get rid of dcr bit 63 trick
From: Tristan Gingold <Tristan.Gingold@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 09:32:37 +0200
Delivery-date: Mon, 15 May 2006 00:39:29 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD5B60840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD5B60840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.5
Le Vendredi 12 Mai 2006 18:14, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) a écrit 
:
> You *really* don't like that dcr bit 63 test, do you? :-)
Yes I don't :-)  Because it doesn't conformto ASDM.

> One disadvantage of your "cpl!=0" test is that it
> gives the "wrong" answer for a fully-virtualized
> domain.  Arun Sharma (before he left Intel) was looking
> at ways of combining paravirtualization performance
> into a fully-virtualized domain.
>
> Also, per the last time this was discussed, I think there
> are plans in future Itaniums to architect the
> discovery of a virtualization layer, which will
> undoubtedly be different than both the dcr-bit-63 and
> cpl!=0 method, so we will just have to change it again
> in the future.
You have good argument for the future.
For the present, I prefer testing cpl (or ar.rsc) which is correct and will be 
work ad vitam eternam.

This is a very localized issue and can be easily changed.  A definitive 
solution may be checking SAL oem_id.

Tristan.

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

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