From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: difference between PGT_gdt_page and PGT_ldt_page Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:23:58 +0100 Message-ID: <43F31D5E.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> References: <43F2FDDC.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <33e8d9a3faf132009b4fe8e3fa8fcdcf@cl.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <33e8d9a3faf132009b4fe8e3fa8fcdcf@cl.cam.ac.uk> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >The page types could quite easily be merged. The main problem is that >all descriptor tables need to be page aligned. We could get rid of that >restriction for LDTs I think. Wouldn't that imply that you don't need a special PGT_ldt_page type then anymore? Jan