From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] RFC arm/domain: Reject invalid combinations of domain creation flags
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:02:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ea68afe-439b-82db-149a-af95cabe3b32@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <07732b07-dd2a-ae4c-58f2-ff938db82c77@arm.com>
On 13/03/18 14:42, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 12/03/18 16:32, Wei Liu wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 07:59:16PM +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> On 03/09/2018 01:18 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> ARM guests are HVM and have hardware assisted paging. There are no
>>>> PV guests
>>>> or shadow paging, and all other creation flags are x86 specific.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
>>>> CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
>>>> CC: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>>>> CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
>>>>
>>>> RFC. This is untested, but I noticed it when putting together the
>>>> preceeding
>>>> patch. There is a moderate chance that this will cause things to
>>>> explode
>>>> because of how libxl handles ARM guest construction, but something
>>>> along these
>>>> lines is the right thing to do.
>>>
>>> Tools and hypervisor are considering ARM guests as PV. So this patch is
>>> going to break boot. There are an action (XEN-102) to move ARM
>>> guests to
>>> behave more like PVH from the tools POV. I am not sure when I will
>>> have time
>>> to look at it thought.
>>>
>>> For the time being, I am wondering if we could override the flags
>>> for Arm in
>>> the toolstack?
>>>
>>
>> Is that necessary? I don't think the rest of this series will break ARM
>> at first glance.
>
> AFAICT, the rest of the series will not break ARM. So I think it would
> be fine to just drop this patch for the time being.
I'll drop the patch for now. This was just meant to get the problem on
peoples radar.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-15 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-09 13:18 [PATCH 0/7] xen: More assorted improvements to domain creation Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 1/7] xen/domain: Drop DOMCRF_dummy Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:12 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-09 16:46 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-11 20:01 ` Julien Grall
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 2/7] xen/domain: Drop all DOMCRF_* constants Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:12 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-09 14:14 ` Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:16 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-09 16:48 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-11 20:02 ` Julien Grall
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 3/7] RFC arm/domain: Reject invalid combinations of domain creation flags Andrew Cooper
2018-03-11 19:59 ` Julien Grall
2018-03-12 16:32 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-13 14:42 ` Julien Grall
2018-03-15 20:02 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 4/7] x86/domain: Remove unused parameters from {hvm, pv}_domain_initialise() Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:13 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-09 16:49 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-13 12:05 ` Roger Pau Monné
2018-03-15 20:09 ` Andrew Cooper
2018-03-16 10:58 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 5/7] x86/domain: Optimise the order of actions in arch_domain_create() Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:43 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-09 16:54 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-15 20:15 ` Andrew Cooper
2018-03-16 7:40 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-13 12:18 ` Roger Pau Monné
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 6/7] xen/domain: Pass the full domctl_createdomain struct to create_domain() Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:50 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-09 17:00 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-09 17:06 ` Andrew Cooper
2018-03-12 12:57 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-11 20:08 ` Julien Grall
2018-03-09 13:18 ` [PATCH 7/7] xen/mm: Clean up share_xen_page_with_guest() API Andrew Cooper
2018-03-09 14:53 ` Wei Liu
2018-03-11 20:29 ` Julien Grall
2018-03-13 12:28 ` Roger Pau Monné
2018-03-13 14:39 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-15 20:25 ` Andrew Cooper
2018-03-16 7:43 ` Jan Beulich
2018-03-16 8:58 ` Andrew Cooper
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=0ea68afe-439b-82db-149a-af95cabe3b32@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=julien.grall@arm.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).