Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: modify kernel mappingscorresponding to granted pages
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Date: Wed Aug 10 2011 - 09:51:08 EST
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:06:04AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 16:50 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > So I hadn't looked at this in detail, but I wonder if we can use the
> > > > MULTIcall for this? It looks like we need to do two hypercalls so why
> > > > not batch it?
> > >
> > > That was going to be my next question. We should definitely batch these
> > > if possible.
> > >
> > > > And while we are it - we could change the MMU ops to only do this on
> > > > initial domain and for the domU case do the old mechanism?
> > >
> > > We need this in domU for driver domains and the like, don't we?
> > Sure, but I believe the majority of domU domains would not require this.
> The overhead of this stuff is low if not used, isn't it? Compared with
> the complexity of having domains know if they might be used as a driver
> domain or not that seems like the tradeoff to be aiming for.
> > I was thinking that when we start playing with the device/driver domains
> > we would want to escalate the privilige level (or perhaps not)?
> We don't want any escalation of privilege over and above what is
> necessary to be a driver domain, which is generally none.
> > Or
> > perhaps introcuce a new type - "if (xen_driver_domain())" to recognize
> > that we are special ?
> Where does the information to set xen_driver_domain == TRUE come from?
No idea. Was just thinking about it.. but you have convienced me it
is not worth looking at.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/