>>> patch is ok?
>>
>> No - Tim having confirmed that shadow mode doesn't support 1Gb pages,
> the feature clearly must not be made visible for shadow mode guest.
>Indeed. Liang, Can you add the shadow mode check in the next version?
Ok , I will do it and resend the patch.
Jan Beulich wrote on 2014-11-25:
On 25.11.14 at 02:47, wrote:
>> Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-19:
>>> At 01:29 + on 19 Nov (1416356943), Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-18:
> In this case, the guest is entitled to _expect_ pagefaults on 1GB
> mappings if CPUID
>>> On 25.11.14 at 02:47, wrote:
> Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-19:
>> At 01:29 + on 19 Nov (1416356943), Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
>>> Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-18:
In this case, the guest is entitled to _expect_ pagefaults on 1GB
mappings if CPUID claims they are not supported. That s
Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-19:
> At 01:29 + on 19 Nov (1416356943), Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
>> Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-18:
>>> In this case, the guest is entitled to _expect_ pagefaults on 1GB
>>> mappings if CPUID claims they are not supported. That sounds like
>>> an unlikely thing for the
At 01:29 + on 19 Nov (1416356943), Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-18:
> > In this case, the guest is entitled to _expect_ pagefaults on 1GB
> > mappings if CPUID claims they are not supported. That sounds like an
> > unlikely thing for the guest to be relying on, but Xen it
Tim Deegan wrote on 2014-11-18:
> At 14:26 + on 18 Nov (1416317209), Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 11:41 +, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
Hmm - this is a pitfall waiting to happen.
In the case that there is a heterogeneous setup with one 1G
capable and one 1G inca
At 14:26 + on 18 Nov (1416317209), Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 11:41 +, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > > Hmm - this is a pitfall waiting to happen.
> > >
> > > In the case that there is a heterogeneous setup with one 1G capable
> > > and one 1G incapable server, Xen cannot forcib
On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 11:41 +, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > Hmm - this is a pitfall waiting to happen.
> >
> > In the case that there is a heterogeneous setup with one 1G capable
> > and one 1G incapable server, Xen cannot forcibly prevent the use of 1G
> > pages on the capable hardware. Any VM w
Andrew Cooper wrote on 2014-11-18:
> On 18/11/14 10:14, Tim Deegan wrote:
>> At 17:25 + on 17 Nov (1416241517), Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 17/11/14 17:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 16:40 + on 17 Nov (1416238835), Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 17/11/14 16:30, Tim Deegan wrote:
>> At 16:
On 18/11/14 10:14, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 17:25 + on 17 Nov (1416241517), Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 17/11/14 17:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
>>> At 16:40 + on 17 Nov (1416238835), Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 17/11/14 16:30, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 16:24 + on 17 Nov (1416237888), Jan Beuli
At 17:25 + on 17 Nov (1416241517), Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 17/11/14 17:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > At 16:40 + on 17 Nov (1416238835), Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> On 17/11/14 16:30, Tim Deegan wrote:
> >>> At 16:24 + on 17 Nov (1416237888), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.11.14 at 16:39
On 17/11/14 17:00, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 16:40 + on 17 Nov (1416238835), Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 17/11/14 16:30, Tim Deegan wrote:
>>> At 16:24 + on 17 Nov (1416237888), Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 17.11.14 at 16:39, wrote:
> Liang Li writes ("[PATCH] libxc: Expose the pdpe1gb cp
At 16:40 + on 17 Nov (1416238835), Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 17/11/14 16:30, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > At 16:24 + on 17 Nov (1416237888), Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 17.11.14 at 16:39, wrote:
> >>> Liang Li writes ("[PATCH] libxc: Expose the pdpe1gb cpuid flag to guest"):
> If hardware
On 17/11/14 16:30, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 16:24 + on 17 Nov (1416237888), Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.11.14 at 16:39, wrote:
>>> Liang Li writes ("[PATCH] libxc: Expose the pdpe1gb cpuid flag to guest"):
If hardware support the pdpe1gb flag, expose it to guest by default.
Users do
At 16:24 + on 17 Nov (1416237888), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.11.14 at 16:39, wrote:
> > Liang Li writes ("[PATCH] libxc: Expose the pdpe1gb cpuid flag to guest"):
> >> If hardware support the pdpe1gb flag, expose it to guest by default.
> >> Users don't have to use a 'cpuid= ' option in c
>>> On 17.11.14 at 16:39, wrote:
> Liang Li writes ("[PATCH] libxc: Expose the pdpe1gb cpuid flag to guest"):
>> If hardware support the pdpe1gb flag, expose it to guest by default.
>> Users don't have to use a 'cpuid= ' option in config file to turn
>> it on.
>
> I don't understand what this fla
Liang Li writes ("[PATCH] libxc: Expose the pdpe1gb cpuid flag to guest"):
> If hardware support the pdpe1gb flag, expose it to guest by default.
> Users don't have to use a 'cpuid= ' option in config file to turn
> it on.
I don't understand what this flag does. I guess from the name it
turns on
If hardware support the pdpe1gb flag, expose it to guest by default.
Users don't have to use a 'cpuid= ' option in config file to turn
it on.
Signed-off-by: Liang Li
---
tools/libxc/xc_cpuid_x86.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/libxc/xc_cpuid_x86.c b/tools/libxc/xc_
18 matches
Mail list logo
