From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mukesh Rathor Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 8/16]: PVH xen: domain creation code changes Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:50:11 -0800 Message-ID: <20130115165011.764c7180@mantra.us.oracle.com> References: <20130111175731.78821167@mantra.us.oracle.com> <50F3FEE602000078000B540B@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <50F3FEE602000078000B540B@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:49:42 +0000 "Jan Beulich" wrote: > >>> On 12.01.13 at 02:57, Mukesh Rathor > >>> wrote: > > +#if 0 > > + /* should we allow PV dom0 to create PVH domU's ???? */ > > + if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) && !is_pvh_vcpu(current) ) > > + return -EINVAL; > > +#endif > > Any Dom0 ought to be able to construct any kind of guest imo. Agree. Removed the code. > So you add these hooks, call them unconditionally, yet neither VMX > nor SVM implement them? What's the purpose? Series of patches > are expected to be consistent at each patch boundary. I'm told to keep patch sizes small, so I try to group together changes. The functions are small/generic enough I figured it would be OK. > > --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vcpu.h Fri Jan 11 16:29:49 > > 2013 -0800 +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vcpu.h Fri Jan 11 > > 16:31:33 2013 -0800 @@ -104,6 +104,13 @@ struct nestedvcpu { > > > > #define vcpu_nestedhvm(v) ((v)->arch.hvm_vcpu.nvcpu) > > > > +/* add any PVH specific fields here */ > > +struct pvh_hvm_vcpu_ext > > +{ > > + /* Guest-specified relocation of vcpu_info. */ > > + unsigned long pvh_vcpu_info_mfn; > > Isn't that a field equivalent to v->arch.pv_vcpu.vcpu_info_mfn? > Preferably they would be shared then, or if not, having "pvh" in > the containing structure's field name and the field name here is > clearly one too much. No, it's a union, so can't use pv_vcpu.vcpu_info_mfn. I like the 3 char prefix to field name so grep/cscope can find it easily. Thanks, Mukesh