From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [patch 07/20] XEN-paravirt: paravirt shared kernel pmd flag Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 08:59:01 +0000 Message-ID: <45AB5065.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> References: <20070113014539.408244126@goop.org> <20070113014647.796412179@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070113014647.796412179@goop.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Andrew Morton Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Chris Wright , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org >>> Jeremy Fitzhardinge 13.01.07 02:45 >>> >Xen does not allow guests to have the kernel pmd shared between page >tables, so parameterize pgtable.c to allow both modes of operation. I don't think the change to vmalloc_sync_all in this patch is necessary - the mechanism exists solely for dealing with modular users of the die notifier in the NMI case. Since there's no NMI visible to guests, I don't think the mechanism is necessary; it could even be completely circumvented for paravirtual guests. Jan