From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26341CC6B1F for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:39:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.1448627.1664644 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1xGvRh-0006bF-79; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:49 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 1448627.1664644; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1xGvRh-0006b8-2r; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:49 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 1448627; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:47 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1xGvRf-0006Zx-LJ for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:47 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1xGvRf-00000004zKD-2wfF; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:47 +0000 Received: from 224.pool85-54-217.dynamic.orange.es ([85.54.217.224] helo=localhost) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1xGvRe-00000000lG7-2zdI; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 09:38:47 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xenproject.org; s=20200302mail; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date; bh=kC0UHRoom6bNbAsITqxVGNMRutUqVopLCO5sqKYshd0=; b=oULrsqCnHKVTVpArqc4km4m6GZ 5WsKJU8Awlb0KLB+eJNDwZc6YELAI/aRNawGMzvDmYWvUOb3ECATwdEf2lUClktvkckz3ChBSIjTU s0h5VqWMisEK308AN8gPQkKmcYriv7pahcfqrn2ATDn82JvHOLwTf3h9JiaVf49a3z74=; Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 11:38:45 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Jan Beulich Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , Andrew Cooper , Teddy Astie Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/15] x86/PVH: split pvh_setup_vmx_realmode_helpers() Message-ID: References: <1b4c2bb4-118d-497c-8d7d-f3824fd61a73@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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.