From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: PVH and mtrr/PAT.........
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 18:42:27 -0800
Message-ID: <20131120184227.2cf85302@mantra.us.oracle.com>
References: <20131119181139.5e794708@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<528C83F00200007800104DB6@nat28.tlf.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>
Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>) id 1VjKDy-0007DA-IQ
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 02:42:34 +0000
In-Reply-To: <528C83F00200007800104DB6@nat28.tlf.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: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 08:42:08 +0000
"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

> >>> On 20.11.13 at 03:11, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
> >>> wrote:
> > After rebasing my dom0 on latest, it didn't boot. After debugging
> > couple days, it turned out to be :
> > 
> > +    if ( is_pvh_domain(d) )
> > +    {
> > +        if ( direct_mmio )
> > +            return MTRR_TYPE_UNCACHABLE;
> > +        return MTRR_TYPE_WRBACK;
> > +    }
> > +
> >  
> > I had in my patches, missing in epte_get_entry_emt() in latest.
> > 
> > So, since I don't know much about this, is an HVM guest setting
> > MTRR range types? Looking for suggestions on best way to do this
> > for PVH. 
> 
> A HVM guest is permitted to write to (virtual) MTRRs, whereas a PV
> guest isn't. I'm inclined to prefer PV behavior here to be used for
> PVH (since, as explained by Dongxiao, MTRRs don't really matter
> for VMX guests anyway, i.e. the setting of (virtual) MTRRs needs to
> get translated to EPT memory types anyway, hence a PVH guest
> ought to be fine ignoring the MTRRs altogether and handling memory
> types exclusively via PAT mechanisms).

Ok. So, it appears that for PV, we store the cacheattr
in page_info and use it during pte update. But in case of PVH, 
the page tables are native, the pte update is native, so we
don't really have access to PCD/PWT/PAT bits in the pte entry!

It says PAT+PWT+PCD selects a PAT entry from the IA32_PAT msr.
In case of PVH, the msr is guest managed, and intercept is disabled.
I assume the EPT should mirror the pte PAT entries?

Or, can we just set WB for all RAM, and UC for all non-ram for 
PVH and keep it simple?

Thanks a lot for the help.
Mukesh