RE: Guest-visible phys2mach part of Xen arch-neutral API? was:[Xen-devel] Uses of &frame_table[xfn]

["Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>]

>From: Keir Fraser
>Sent: 2005年12月30日 4:34
>
>On 29 Dec 2005, at 18:51, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:
>
>> So then is p==m in dom0 (and driver domains) an unacceptable design
>> alternative for (non-x86) Xen architectures?  If it is acceptable,
>> then the question remains:
>
>I think *that* is the critical question here. My feeling is that having
>p==m for any domain (even domain0) may have a siginificant effect on
>the amount of otherwise arch-indep xenlinux code you can share. My
>feeling is therefore that dom0 should be like any domU and have
>virtualised p (!= m). This is somewhat a gut feeling though -- perhaps
>something to discuss and think about at the summit?

Agree.

>
>It's true that p!=m in a driver domain is a bit more of a pain than
>p==m, but a lot of the work has been done for x86/xen and I think can
>be used by other architectures.
>

Yes.

Thanks,
Kevin 

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