On 3/13/2017 7:24 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.03.17 at 09:42, <yu.c.zh...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
On 3/11/2017 12:03 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
But there's a wider understanding issue I'm having here: What is
an "entry" here? Commonly I would assume this to refer to an
individual (4k) page, but it looks like you really mean table entry,
i.e. possibly representing a 2M or 1G page.
Well, it should be an entry pointing to a 4K page(only).
For p2m_ioreq_server, we shall not meet huge page. Because they are
changed from p2m_ram_rw pages
in set_mem_type() -> p2m_change_type_one(), which calls p2m_set_entry()
with PAGE_ORDER_4K specified.
And recombination of large pages won't ever end up hitting these?
Well, by recombination I guess you refer to the POD pages? I do not
think p2m_ioreq_server
pages will be combined now, which means we do not need to worry about
recounting the
p2m_ioreq_server entries while a split happens.
And as to type change from p2m_ram_rw to p2m_ioreq_server, even if this
is done on a large
page, p2m_change_type_one() will split the page and only mark one ept
entry(which maps to
a 4K page) as p2m_ioreq_server(other 511 entries remains as p2m_ram_rw).
So I still believe
counting p2m_ioreq_server entries here is correct.
Besides, if we look from XenGT requirement side, it is guest graphic
page tables we are trying to
write-protect, which are 4K in size.
Thanks
Yu
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
