[XenPPC] Re: xencomm porting and "inline" handles

[Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 08:19 +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> Le Mardi 26 Septembre 2006 20:23, Hollis Blanchard a Ãcrit :
> > On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 10:04 +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> > > After more work, inline xencomm is not that magic: it doesn't work for
> > > modules which are loaded in virtual memory.  So I have to use mini
> > > xencomm at least for modules.
> >
> > What's the problem with modules? Their text/data isn't physically
> > contiguous, but where exactly is the problem?
> Inline xencomm only works for physically contiguous area because only the 
> base 
> address is passed.  Therefore it doesn't work for modules.

I understand that; please explain exactly what about the modules isn't
working.

For example, the stack used in kernel modules is still physically
contiguous, so using stack-allocated data structures should work fine.
However, making hypercalls directly using global data structures
wouldn't work. However, the "inline" code is only being used for the
hypercalls that could be made early. Is that the problem? Please
identify the specific issue(s).

-- 
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center


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