From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerd Hoffmann Subject: Re: [XenPPC] Re: New domain builder in xen-unstable Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:54:48 +0100 Message-ID: <45F917E8.3010202@suse.de> References: <1173477936.29309.133.camel@basalt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1173477936.29309.133.camel@basalt> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Hollis Blanchard Cc: Brendan Cully , Xen Development Mailing List , xen-ppc-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hollis Blanchard wrote: > I can't just ifdef PowerPC's xc_linux_build back in, because libelf > doesn't map page-by-page like the old ELF loader did. That means I need > to pre-map the memory, which starts dragging in xc_dom infrastructure. You don't need more xc_dom infrastructure, I've tried to make the libelf bits independant of the xc_dom stoff for exactly that reason. Have a look at the hvm loader (xc_hvm_build.c). It uses libelf too, it has a loadelfimage() which maps the memory, calls elf_load_binary, unmaps again. You could do that too. Oh, and an example of page-by-page loading using libelf is in xen/arch/ia64/xen/domain.c. > What is the difference between dom->shadow_enable and > xc_dom_feature_translated()? It's identical now I think. In the early days (before split-off elf handling code to libelf) I've tried to use the new domain builder for hvm too, the logic whevener pfn->mfn translation is needed was a bit more complex than just looking up shadow_enabled. HTH, Gerd -- Gerd Hoffmann