Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 Oct 2006 07:53:48 +0200 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/13] KVM: kvm data structures |
| |
Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 26 October 2006 19:24, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> +struct kvm { >> + spinlock_t lock; /* protects everything except vcpus */ >> + int nmemslots; >> + struct kvm_memory_slot memslots[KVM_MEMORY_SLOTS]; >> + struct list_head active_mmu_pages; >> + struct kvm_vcpu vcpus[KVM_MAX_VCPUS]; >> + int memory_config_version; >> + int busy; >> +}; >> > > Assuming that you move to the host-user == guest-real memory > model, will this data structure still be needed? It would > be really nice if a guest could simply consist of a number > of vcpu structures that happen to be used from threads in the > same process address space, but I find it hard to tell if > that is realistic. >
We'd still need the shadow page table data structures (or the nested page tables pgd).
-- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
- 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/
| |