[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 06/10] xen/arm: Retrieve p2m type in get_page_from_gfn
On 12/09/2013 04:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 16:50 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
On 12/09/2013 04:06 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 03:34 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in v2:
- Use p2m_lookup as p2m_get_entry was removed
---
xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h
index f4bcd7d..b63204d 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/p2m.h
@@ -109,7 +109,8 @@ static inline struct page_info *get_page_from_gfn(
struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn, p2m_type_t *t, p2m_query_t q)
{
struct page_info *page;
- unsigned long mfn = gmfn_to_mfn(d, gfn);
+ paddr_t maddr = p2m_lookup(d, pfn_to_paddr(gfn), t);
+ unsigned long mfn = maddr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
I think this resend happened before I replied to the original a second
time, (in <1386583029.13126.13.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) so you
hadn't seen it.
Indeed, I will fix it.
TL;DR: INVALID_MADDR >> PAGE_SHIFT != INVALID_MFN on arm64.
Does it mean that INVALID_MFN can be a valid mfn on arm64? If so, we
have some place in common code where this constant is used (see
common/domain.c for instance).
No, INVALID_MFN is 0xffffffffffffffff which is fine[0].
But given INVALID_MADDR of 0xffffffffffffffff,
(INVALID_MADDR>>PAGE_SHIFT) is 0x000fffffffffffff.
oh right, I didn't pay attention for that. The patch is now fixed.
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
