Re: [Xen-devel] difference between PGT_gdt_page and PGT_ldt_page

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 15 Feb 2006, at 09:09, Jan Beulich wrote:

> Is there any particular reason why there cannot just be a 
> PGT_descr_page, combining the two currently existing types?
> Even if it's only a page, I'd want to avoid wasting memory for 
> nothing, and i386's default_ldt could easily move into
> the same page cpu_gdt_table lives in. Alternatively one could also use 
> empty_zero_page here. Or do it like on x86-64,
> where the symbol doesn't exist at all, and knowledge about it being 
> all zeroes is used where needed. Jan
If default_ldt can be replaced by empty_zero_page, why do we need a 
default LDT at all?
The page types could quite easily be merged. The main problem is that 
all descriptor tables need to be page aligned. We could get rid of that 
restriction for LDTs I think.
 -- Keir


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