On 18.07.2025 13:19, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 7/17/25 12:37 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.07.2025 11:42, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>>> On 7/16/25 6:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 17:53, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> In this case, the P2M PTE valid bit will be set to 0, but the P2M
On 7/17/25 12:37 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.07.2025 11:42, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
On 7/16/25 6:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 17:53, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
On 7/16/25 1:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 13:32, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.07.2025 11:42, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 7/16/25 6:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.07.2025 17:53, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>>> On 7/16/25 1:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 13:32, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 10.06.2025 15:05,
On 7/16/25 6:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 17:53, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
On 7/16/25 1:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 13:32, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.06.2025 15:05, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
+++ b/xen/ar
On 16.07.2025 17:53, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 7/16/25 1:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.07.2025 13:32, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>>> On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.06.2025 15:05, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
>
On 7/16/25 1:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.07.2025 13:32, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.06.2025 15:05, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
+++ b/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
@@ -387,6 +387,17 @@ static inline bool p2me_is_valid(struct p2m_domain
On 16.07.2025 13:32, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 10.06.2025 15:05, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
>>> @@ -387,6 +387,17 @@ static inline bool p2me_is_valid(struct p2m_domain
>>> *p2m, pte_t pte)
>>>
On 7/2/25 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.06.2025 15:05, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
+++ b/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
@@ -387,6 +387,17 @@ static inline bool p2me_is_valid(struct p2m_domain *p2m,
pte_t pte)
return p2m_type_radix_get(p2m, pte) != p2m_invalid;
}
+/
On 10.06.2025 15:05, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/p2m.c
> @@ -387,6 +387,17 @@ static inline bool p2me_is_valid(struct p2m_domain *p2m,
> pte_t pte)
> return p2m_type_radix_get(p2m, pte) != p2m_invalid;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * pte_is_* helpers are c
Implement the p2m_next_level() function, which enables traversal and dynamic
allocation of intermediate levels (if necessary) in the RISC-V
p2m (physical-to-machine) page table hierarchy.
To support this, the following helpers are introduced:
- p2me_is_mapping(): Determines whether a PTE represent
10 matches
Mail list logo