From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ed White <edmund.h.white@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] x86/altp2m: add control of
	suppress_ve.
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:53:44 -0700
Message-ID: <558AEEA8.1000305@intel.com>
References: <1434999372-3688-1-git-send-email-edmund.h.white@intel.com>
	<1434999372-3688-8-git-send-email-edmund.h.white@intel.com>
	<558ADCEE0200007800088FF7@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <558ADCEE0200007800088FF7@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Ravi Sahita <ravi.sahita@intel.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, tlengyel@novetta.com, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 06/24/2015 07:38 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 22.06.15 at 20:56, <edmund.h.white@intel.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/p2m.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/p2m.h
>> @@ -237,6 +237,19 @@ struct p2m_domain {
>>                                         p2m_access_t *p2ma,
>>                                         p2m_query_t q,
>>                                         unsigned int *page_order);
>> +    int                (*set_entry_full)(struct p2m_domain *p2m,
>> +                                         unsigned long gfn,
>> +                                         mfn_t mfn, unsigned int page_order,
>> +                                         p2m_type_t p2mt,
>> +                                         p2m_access_t p2ma,
>> +                                         unsigned int sve);
>> +    mfn_t              (*get_entry_full)(struct p2m_domain *p2m,
>> +                                         unsigned long gfn,
>> +                                         p2m_type_t *p2mt,
>> +                                         p2m_access_t *p2ma,
>> +                                         p2m_query_t q,
>> +                                         unsigned int *page_order,
>> +                                         unsigned int *sve);
> 
> I have to admit that I find the _full suffixes here pretty odd. Based
> on the functionality, they should be _sve. But then it seems
> questionable how they could be useful to the generic p2m layer
> anyway, i.e. why there would need to be such hooks in the first
> place.

I did originally use _sve suffixes. I changed them because there
may be some future case where these routines control some other
EPTE bit too. I made them hooks because I thought calling ept...
functions directly would be a layering violation.

Ed