[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] Question about x86_compat


  • To: <eak@xxxxxxxxxx>, <Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 09:45:34 +0000
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 01:52:50 -0800
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: Acg2WmpkqOwsDKJNEdy0zwAX8io7RQ==
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Question about x86_compat

It should probably be propagating the error, yes.

 -- Keir

On 4/12/07 02:56, "beth kon" <eak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> arch_setup_meminit ignores the return code from x86_compat. Is this
> intentional? I see that the message printed in x86_compat is a warning
> if the do_domctl fails, so assume ignoring the return code in
> arch_setup_meminit may be intentional. If so, what does this imply when
> a 32 bit guest attempts to start on a 64 bit machine?
> 
> I followed up the call chain from x86_compat (trying to understand its
> intent) and it appears to be a pretty integral part of creating any
> domain, so I assume that XEN_DOMCTL_set_address_size is the call that
> actually specifies to Xen whether a domain is 32 or 64? So if that call
> fails, is the domain just set to be the machine's native size by
> default? But what would that mean for a 32 on 64 guest?
> 
> I hope my questions are clear. This area is a little muddy for me. Thanks!



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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.