lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [kvm-devel] [announce] [patch] KVM paravirtualization for Linux
From
Date
On Sun, 2007-01-07 at 14:20 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>
> Well, you did say it was ad-hoc. For reference, this is how I see the
> hypercall API:
[snip]
> - Guest/host communications is by guest physical addressed, as the
> virtual->physical translation is much cheaper on the guest (__pa() vs
> a page table walk).

Strongly agreed. One of the major problems we had with the PowerPC Xen
port was that Xen passes virtual addresses (even userspace virtual
addresses!) to the hypervisor. Performing a MMU search on PowerPC is far
more convoluted than x86's table walk and is not feasible in software.

I'm anxious to avoid the same mistake wherever possible.

Of course, even with physical addresses, data structures that straddle
page boundaries prevent the hypervisor from mapping contiguous physical
pages to discontiguous machine pages (or whatever terminology you want
to use).

IBM's Power Hypervisor passes hypercall data in registers most of the
time. In the places it communicates via memory, I believe the parameter
is actually a physical frame number, and the size is explicitly limited
to one page.

-Hollis

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-01-07 18:53    [W:0.507 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site