[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] tools: introduce parameter max_ranges.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 20 January 2016 10:16 > To: Kevin Tian; Yu, Zhang; Wei Liu; Paul Durrant > Cc: Keir (Xen.org); jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; Andrew Cooper; xen- > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Lv, Zhiyuan; Stefano Stabellini > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] tools: introduce parameter > max_ranges. > > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 03:58 +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote: > > > From: Yu, Zhang [mailto:yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:33 AM > > > > As a feature this write-protection has nothing to be GPU > > > > virtualization specific. > > > > In the future the same mediated pass-through idea used in XenGT may > > > > be > > > > used on other I/O devices which need to shadow some structure w/ > > > > requirement > > > > to write-protect guest memory. So it's not good to tie this to either > > > > XenGT > > > > or GTT. > > > > > > > Thank you, Kevin. > > > Well, if this parameter is not supposed to be xengt specific, we do not > > > need to connect it with any xengt flag such as ."vgt=1" or "GVT-g=1". > > > Hence the user will have to configure the max_wp_ram_ranges himself, > > > right? > > > > > > > Not always. The option can be configured manually by the user, or > > automatically set in the code when "vgt=1" is recognized. > > Is the latter approach not always sufficient? IOW, if it can be done > automatically, why would the user need to tweak it? > I think latter is sufficient for now. We always have the option of adding a specific wp_ram_ranges parameter in future if there is a need. Paul > Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |