From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: Move private memory slot position Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:02:50 +0200 Message-ID: <48FB13DA.1090803@redhat.com> References: <200809041130.20249.sheng.yang@intel.com> <200810131717.26020.sheng.yang@intel.com> <48F6FA9F.3080408@redhat.com> <200810161642.29201.sheng@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: Sheng Yang Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:52400 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750938AbYJSLCx (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Oct 2008 07:02:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200810161642.29201.sheng@linux.intel.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sheng Yang wrote: >> I've been thinking that we can get rid of internal slots, by placing the >> TSS, real mode identity map, and APIC access page in the bios. Of >> course we would need a new ioctl to let the kernel know where the >> scratch memory is located and how much of it is available. >> >> > > How about put into userspace e.g. pc_init()? I think more easy than keeping > bios sync with KVM. That was my plan -- bios reserves space, qemu tells the kernel where it is, kernel uses the space. > Anyway, vmx specific thing would become generic. I'd like > to keep it as what it is at least for now... > It's already exposed to userspace, as userspace tells the kernel where to put the slots. The only advantage is that we reduce slot count and don't have to mess with the e820 map. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function