Re: [PATCH 12/12] Nested Virtualization: hap-on-hap

[Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com>]

On 04/29/11 11:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 05.04.11 at 17:48, Christoph Egger<Christoph.Egger@amd.com>  wrote:
>> diff -r cfde4384be14 -r 28809c365861 xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h
>> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h
>> ...
>> @@ -225,6 +227,7 @@ struct paging_vcpu {
>> #define MAX_CPUID_INPUT 40
>> typedef xen_domctl_cpuid_t cpuid_input_t;
>>
>> +#define MAX_NESTEDP2M 10
>> struct p2m_domain;
>> struct time_scale {
>>      int shift;
>> @@ -258,6 +261,12 @@ struct arch_domain
>>      struct paging_domain paging;
>>      struct p2m_domain *p2m;
>>
>> +    /* nestedhvm: translate l2 guest physical to host physical */
>> +    struct p2m_domain *nested_p2m[MAX_NESTEDP2M];
>> +    spinlock_t nested_p2m_lock;
>> +    int nested_p2m_locker;
>> +    const char *nested_p2m_function;
>> +
>>      /* NB. protected by d->event_lock and by irq_desc[irq].lock */
>>      int *irq_pirq;
>>      int *pirq_irq;
>
> Was there a specific reason to add this to struct arch_domain
> instead of struct hvm_domain? I.e. can any pf these fields be
> used on pv (or idle) domains?

The reason is that there is already a 'struct p2m_domain *p2m' field.
If that can be moved to struct hvm_domain then  nested_p2m can
definitely move over to there, too.

Christoph

-- 
---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85689 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632