From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ed White <edmund.h.white@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] Alternate p2m: support multiple
 copies of host p2m
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:21:31 -0800
Message-ID: <54B9489B.6030505@intel.com>
References: <1420838801-11704-1-git-send-email-edmund.h.white@intel.com>	<54B56B79.3010109@citrix.com>	<54B579CD.60804@intel.com>	<54B583FC.4060800@citrix.com>	<54B58E90.20309@intel.com>	<54B6151402000078000C580B@mail.emea.novell.com>	<CAErYnshkCQxHcdFXj-UDeDV9Z5Umwh3QYtDrFDuQU+U3WV1Ohw@mail.gmail.com>	<54B65C920200007800054BAD@mail.emea.novell.com>	<CAErYnsgCpzjZuDJT7vaZcbZjhTmEGS+E8d1_UF9Z0RcC4HPa_w@mail.gmail.com>	<54B6A8D9.904@intel.com>	<CAErYnsh27FVdKXJvuggvXCcMLLgUjtwOHkx6s00Zpu_-s5e_FQ@mail.gmail.com>	<54B7F98F.1050300@intel.com>
	<CAErYnsgGWOTv55QK7EPmeEv4UHbq9iUZ8Q2KXDdEfNbxjAX2-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAErYnsgGWOTv55QK7EPmeEv4UHbq9iUZ8Q2KXDdEfNbxjAX2-Q@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Tamas K Lengyel <tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>
Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 01/16/2015 02:43 AM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Ed White <edmund.h.white@intel.com> wrote:
>> On 01/15/2015 02:39 AM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>>> There are ways of avoiding the
>>>> single-step too, although I don't think that falls within the scope
>>>> of this conversation.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>
>>> I would be very interested in knowing how we can avoid the singlestep
>>> phase. Are you envisioning using this with a split-TLB? IMHO this is a
>>> pretty critical component of effectively using the new feature so
>>> should be within scope of this discussion.
>>>
>>
>> It's an optimization certainly, but it's not required, and it's not
>> a technique we have placed in the public domain. You could try talking
>> to us under NDA or figure it out for yourself, but I can't detail
>> it here.
>>
>> Ed
> 
> That's unfortunate. I would have been happy to extend the xen-access
> test tool to exercise this feature but contributing code that is known
> to be sub-optimal from the beginning just doesn't feel right.

If you don't feel it's worth improving the existing solution unless
you can make it perfect, that's your decision. I don't get to decide
what Intel makes public and what it doesn't.

Ed