Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 12/13] Nested Virtualization: vram

[Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 16:47 +0100 on 08 Sep (1283964447), Christoph Egger wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 September 2010 17:07:35 Tim Deegan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is this needed as part of the nested-HVM series or just an independent
> > interface change?
> 
> This is an independent interface change.
> It is not needed to make nested-HVM work in general but it is part of
> a larger change to make log dirty code nested virtualization aware.

Ah; does the current nested-SVM patchset break logdirty?

I don't think making the vram structures per-P2M is the best approach.
We're never going to have more than one vram area to track per guest so
it can just operate on the host-p2m, like it does already.

In general, the log-dirty code operates on N1 pfns, and we won't want a
per-p2m log-dirty bitmap either; we'd only have to fold them together to
use them in the tools.

Cheers,

Tim.

-- 
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)

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