Re: [v6][PATCH 2/2] xen:vtd: missing RMRR mapping while share EPT

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>]

On 2014/8/4 15:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 03.08.14 at 10:04, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> On 2014/8/1 21:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> I'm not sure - this may be an additional piece to be done for
>>> consistency (if the domain builder doesn't already call this), but
>>> since hvmloader doesn't appear to call XENMEM_memory_map it
>>> won't do on its own I'm afraid.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, current hvmloader can't do this on its own.
>>
>> But in PV case, e820_host, seems be a refereed way to our goal. Even we
>> may reuse some codes here so its a convenient approach.
>
> Only for those PV guests that actually care about e820_host. Non-
> pvops Linux, for example, doesn't, but also has no problem with
> the RMRR ranges overlapping with RAM due to the fully separated
> M and P address spaces. The only issue here would be the risk of
> assigning MMIO overlapping with them.

I will send a preliminary patches to cover this as RFC, please take a 
look at if this is good.

Thanks
Tiejun

>
>> Additionally, I want to know if patch v6 is fine to be acked.
>
> My position hasn't changed: I view this as correct but incomplete,
> and hence not ready for inclusion. With - iirc - Tim being of a
> different opinion, if you want to push for a decision without
> supplying the missing pieces, see the section "Conflict Resolution"
> on http://www.xenproject.org/governance.html. But of course
> I'd much prefer to avoid having to fall back to this, and instead
> have a complete patch set to commit within reasonable time.
>
> Jan
>
>
>