[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Regarding page table management changes from Xen v1 to Xen v2 (and v3)
> >Could you tell me another example other than fork when one can use > >batched PTE > >modifications. > > fork() is the only one for us these days. All others use > update_va_mapping(), act on pagetables that aren't pinned (so the guest > can directly update them without faulting) or are infrequent enough we > do not care. Not sure I understand the last part (aren't pinned ...) - my assumptions about page tables are (these apply to both direct mapped and shadow page tables): 1. Always pinned (backed) - so a access to them cannot cause a page unavailable fault. 2. Always read only to guest - so a read access to them is fine, but a write access will cause a protection fault. Both of these faults are reflected as a PG fault. Are you refering to the case when Xen has "detached" the page table page and has made it RW for guest? Thanks for your answers and patience :-). -Himanshu -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Himanshu Raj PhD Student, GaTech (www.cc.gatech.edu/~rhim) I prefer to receive attachments in an open, non-proprietary format. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |