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] Faulty protection key handling

To: Tristan Gingold <tgingold@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] Faulty protection key handling
From: Jürgen Groß <juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:03:32 +0200
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:01:52 -0700
Domainkey-signature: s=s768; d=fujitsu-siemens.com; c=nofws; q=dns; b=ZUxhRDRxS0HtYqi3AP0g1tu4OotwvrsAj6P2sMtY0/seazr+R4dGduzBkrM/P5MwM4MSOtSBEnuTi3JPXSC1rvctrhh8oG7JfF1AGlqC8cKONnSKwJkQvcrSNntq4RMh;
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20070426191205.GB2497@saphi>
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>
Organization: Fujitsu Siemens Computers
References: <200704251536.20806.dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070426054120.GA2497@saphi> <4630472F.5020003@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070426190821.GA2497@saphi> <20070426191205.GB2497@saphi>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070328)
Tristan Gingold wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:08:21PM +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 08:31:11AM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>>> Tristan Gingold wrote:
>>> For PV domains this should be easy: 15 PKRs should be enough for the DomU.
>>> For HVM the PKRs must be virtualized completely.
>> I think this is the easiest solution, although it breaks the architecture
>> requirements.
> If you reserve a PKR for the hypervisor, you must reserve a value too.  So
> the PK space must still be reduced ;-)

For PV this is not completely true. If an OS uses PKRs, it has the same
problem as the hypervisor: one PKR with a specific value must always be loaded
for interrupt handling. I would see no problem to use the same PKR and PK
value as the hypervisor (PKR 0 with PK value 0, rwx allowed).
This would eliminate the restriction to 15 PKRs as well.

Juergen

-- 
Juergen Gross                             Principal Developer
IP SW OS6                      Telephone: +49 (0) 89 636 47950
Fujitsu Siemens Computers         e-mail: juergen.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Otto-Hahn-Ring 6                Internet: www.fujitsu-siemens.com
D-81739 Muenchen         Company details: www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html

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