[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [VTD-NEO][patch 0/6] Intel VT-d/Neocleus 1:1 mreged code for PCI passthrough


  • To: "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:49:50 +0100
  • Cc: Guy Zana <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 05:50:29 -0700
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcfvUPA+fwPVGW6LTE+QIE4aSL5IWQFIU1Uo
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [VTD-NEO][patch 0/6] Intel VT-d/Neocleus 1:1 mreged code for PCI passthrough

On 5/9/07 01:08, "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The following 6 patches contains merge of Intel VT-d and Neocleus' 1:1
> mapping patches for enabling HVM guest direct device access that were
> last submitted around end of May.  These patches applied cleanly to
> changeset 15730. 

The 'include' patch doesn't apply any more, and in any case needs splitting
up logically (vtd bits go in vtd patch; neo bits in neo patch; any generic
bits in xen patch). The 'pt' (neo) code looks to throw way too much stuff in
include/xen/ of which I suspect most is private definitions that really
belong in the pt/ directory. Also consider which bits should be in
include/asm rather than include/xen.

The presence of the E820_1TO1 stuff makes me suspect that the 1:1 area
allocation hasn't been cleaned up as much as it should have been. There
shouldn't be any need to modify Xen's permanent e820 map I think.

Haven't looked any further at the Xen parts, but I'll take a look at the
tools patch...

 -- Keir



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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.