> -----Original Message----- > From: Hollis Blanchard [mailto:hollis_blanchard@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 12:23 AM > To: Liu Yu-B13201 > Cc: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvm-ppc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; agraf@xxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kvm/e500v2: MMU optimization > > >> > >> > > Hi Hollis, > > > > Guest uses AS=1 and host uses AS=0, > > so even guest uses the same TID with host, they're in > different space. > > > > Then why guest needs to care about host TID? > > > > > You're absolutely right, but this makes a couple key assumptions: > 1. The guest doesn't try to use AS=1. This is already false in Linux, > because the udbg code uses an AS=1 mapping for the UART, but > this can be > configured out (with a small loss in functionality). In > non-Linux guests > the AS=0 restriction could be onerous. We could map (guest AS, guest TID) to (shadow TID), So that we still don't need to bother host. > 2. A Book E MMU. If we participate in the host "MMU context" > allocation, > the guest -> host address space code could be generalized to include > e.g. an e600 guest on an e500 host, or vice versa. > Hmm.. Not sure it's a real requirement. Thanks, Yu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
