From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NfFj9-0004IG-Hr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:47:47 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40917 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NfFj8-0004Hk-Ss
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:47:46 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim
	4.60) (envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1NfFj7-0003EL-J2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:47:46 -0500
Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:37938 helo=mx1.suse.de)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1NfFj7-0003E3-7f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:47:45 -0500
Message-ID: <4B72E32F.3080205@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:47:43 +0100
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2] qemu-kvm: Speed up of
	the	dirty-bitmap-traveling
References: <4B728FF9.6010707@lab.ntt.co.jp> <4B72B28E.6010801@redhat.com>
	<4B72D69D.7050005@codemonkey.ws> <4B72D838.9060603@suse.de>
	<4B72E051.8090008@codemonkey.ws> <4B72E224.1090901@suse.de>
	<4B72E2D2.7010701@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B72E2D2.7010701@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, mtosatti@redhat.com, OHMURA Kei <ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/10/2010 06:43 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>   
>>> Out of curiousity, why? It seems like an odd interface.
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>> Because on PPC, you usually run PPC32 userspace code on a PPC64 kernel.
>> Unlike with x86, there's no real benefit in using 64 bit userspace.
>>   
>>     
>
> btw, does 32-bit ppc qemu support large memory guests? It doesn't on
> x86, and I don't remember any hacks to support large memory guests
> elsewhere.
>   


It doesn't :-). In fact, the guest we virtualize wouldn't work with > 2
GB anyways, because that needs an iommu implementation.


Alex