From: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger@xenproject.org>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Teddy Astie <teddy.astie@vates.tech>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/15] x86/PVH: split pvh_setup_vmx_realmode_helpers()
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 11:38:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <as9NpQPi-zNFDFiY@Mac.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e2a520da-9dcf-4e04-9e17-add8b12d9a0d@suse.com>
On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 10:24:07AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> All E820 manipulations want to happen before the initrd is placed, or else
> pvh_steal_ram() may steal from the tail part of it. While this is
> currently suitably ordered, mapping the initrd directly into Dom0 will
> want to happen ahead of pvh_populate_p2m(). Hence as a third step, split
> placing VMX data (if needed at all) from actually populating it.
>
> Also move the invocation of pvh_setup_vmx_realmode_helpers() out of
> pvh_populate_p2m(). Make it unconditional as well, instead bailing from
> the function when pvh_place_vmx_realmode_helpers() wasn't called.
I'm overall happy with the idea of moving
pvh_setup_vmx_realmode_helpers() out of pvh_populate_p2m(), however I
would much rather prefer for us to keep two memory maps (the real one
in the domain struct), plus a temporary one that signals used memory,
rather than doing allocation vs placement in two steps. Having to
add custom {acpi,vmx}_info structures for each metadata we want to
place seems strictly worse than keeping two memory maps.
Thanks, Roger.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-14 9:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-12 8:17 [PATCH 00/15] x86: PVH Dom0 loading rework Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:19 ` [PATCH 01/15] x86/EFI: guard against oversized modules Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 10:12 ` George Dunlap
2026-10-12 8:19 ` [PATCH 02/15] x86/PV: make better use of assign_pages() Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 10:16 ` George Dunlap
2026-10-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 03/15] x86/setup: break out E820_RAM accumulation Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 10:20 ` George Dunlap
2026-10-12 10:23 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 11:24 ` George Dunlap
2026-10-13 11:05 ` Roger Pau Monné
2026-10-13 11:39 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:20 ` [PATCH 04/15] x86/setup: special treatment of initrd for PVH Dom0 Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 11:23 ` George Dunlap
2026-10-12 11:51 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 18:58 ` George Dunlap
2026-10-12 8:21 ` [PATCH 05/15] x86/PVH: split pvh_load_kernel() Jan Beulich
2026-10-13 6:45 ` Teddy Astie
2026-10-12 8:21 ` [PATCH 06/15] x86/PVH: keep a copy of Dom0's initial E820 map Jan Beulich
2026-10-13 6:57 ` Teddy Astie
2026-10-13 7:56 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-13 13:48 ` Roger Pau Monné
2026-10-13 14:53 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-13 15:08 ` Roger Pau Monné
2026-10-12 8:22 ` [PATCH 07/15] x86/PVH: lift E820 alignment requirement Jan Beulich
2026-10-13 14:59 ` Roger Pau Monné
2026-10-13 15:13 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:23 ` [PATCH 08/15] x86/PVH: split pvh_setup_acpi() Jan Beulich
2026-10-13 15:52 ` Roger Pau Monné
2026-10-13 16:04 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-14 9:31 ` Roger Pau Monné
2026-10-14 9:42 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:24 ` [PATCH 09/15] x86/PVH: split pvh_setup_vmx_realmode_helpers() Jan Beulich
2026-10-14 9:38 ` Roger Pau Monné [this message]
2026-10-14 9:49 ` Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:24 ` [PATCH 10/15] x86/PVH: convert find_memory() to using a rangeset Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:25 ` [PATCH 11/15] x86/PVH: try to map initrd directly into Dom0 Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:25 ` [PATCH 12/15] x86/PVH: heed the kernel in pvh_steal_ram() Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:26 ` [PATCH 13/15] x86/PVH: prefer smaller E820 regions for stealing from Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:26 ` [PATCH 14/15] x86/PVH: log Dom0's E820 map earlier Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:26 ` [PATCH 15/15] x86/PVH: simplify writing of Dom0's RSDP Jan Beulich
2026-10-12 8:29 ` [PATCH 00/15] x86: PVH Dom0 loading rework Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=as9NpQPi-zNFDFiY@Mac.lan \
--to=roger@xenproject.org \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=teddy.astie@vates.tech \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.