From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Camachat <eric.camachat@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: mmap in PV xen-4.0.1
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:11:20 -0700
Message-ID: <CACeEFf7X1cCwPxDfaCGuUGF0qTnrBO_jnMa_UNd_Ni2=AosAoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACeEFf77eOLLNgsJwEYdzeiuxm+qDcO2zs09FK-Waas0sxcwLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACeEFf5yDb3dh+M3nycmYMaW5Vf+6C57QXZjXEBQZhrwkTHkHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110810091256.GA1537@limbo>
	<CACeEFf6HoD10k5PUP7gNBNteyY=Wh3XTJCOZEmvs+Us+WfahNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110810192546.GA2875@dumpdata.com>
	<CACeEFf5B08guZ2XNKGcuUSP-W=NiqMHxT3o0ghi5ky7QJOeRKg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110811013104.GB1889@limbo>
	<CACeEFf72bXGhgb=O9U-eavV7yqBNAepx_EZ+Lp5nPFa7KK_zeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACeEFf72bXGhgb=O9U-eavV7yqBNAepx_EZ+Lp5nPFa7KK_zeQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Wei Liu <liuw@liuw.name>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Eric Camachat <eric.camachat@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Wei Liu <liuw@liuw.name> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:45:20PM -0700, Eric Camachat wrote:
>>> The idea is move servers into XEN domU.
>>> I saw that 3.0 has built-in XEN support, I can try it later.
>>> But I don't know if other components are compatible with 3.0.
>>>
>>> I just wonder that MFN should equals PFN in PV (para-virtualization),
>>> so it should works properly.
>>>
>>
>> If by "PFN" you mean "Physical Frame Number", then I think you made a
>> wrong assumption here.
>>
>> MFN and PFN has no linear, 1:1 mapping relationship, let alone say
>> they are equal.
>>
>> Wei.
>>
> I misunderstood in GFN and PFN, MFN and GFN should be equal.
> So PV domU has the same memory view with real hardware, right?
>
> Ref. http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/10/09/xen-memory-management-overview-presentation/
>

Let us back to my original concern:
Why remap_pfn_range() woks with my own device node, but deesn't work
with /dev/mem node?
This behavior is confused me.

/Eric