RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH] unify vtlb and vhpt

[Kouya Shimura <kouya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dong, Eddie writes:
> I am not sure about the statement. Putting vTLB in physical VHPT side
> is mixing something, not only sharing. What I mean here is something
> like following pseudo code, (defenitely init code and many cleanup
> was not in this pseudo code).

Yes, mixing. I meant sharing is that the memory is usable for both
vTLB and VHPT.
Mixing is a main concept of my patch in order to expand vTLB size.

> This way, we don't impact low level VHPT walk. and makes it clear
> in concept to distinguish vTLB & VHPT.

I'd rather prefer current implementation(separate vTLB/VHPT) than this
way. It looks less benefit.

In my patch, to distinguish vTLB from VHPT, only two instructions is
added to low level VHPT walk. (besides it's buried into nop slot)
I don't think it's so complicated.

Thanks,
Kouya

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel