From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] libxl,
 hvmloader: Don't relocate memory for MMIO hole
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:32:59 +0100
Message-ID: <51C40FBB.9030200@eu.citrix.com>
References: <1371746007-19073-1-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
	<1371746007-19073-9-git-send-email-george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
	<51C41A1C02000078000DF837@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <51C41A1C02000078000DF837@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: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Hanweidong <hanweidong@huawei.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 21/06/13 08:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 20.06.13 at 18:33, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> @@ -57,6 +59,32 @@ void pci_setup(void)
>>       } *bars = (struct bars *)scratch_start;
>>       unsigned int i, nr_bars = 0;
>>   
>> +    const char *s;
>> +    /*
>> +     * Do we allow hvmloader to relocate guest memory in order to
>> +     * increase the size of the lowmem MMIO hole?  Defaulting to 1
>> +     * here will mean that non-libxl toolstacks (including xend and
>> +     * home-grown ones) will experience this series as "no change".
>> +     * It does mean that those using qemu-xen will still experience
>> +     * the bug (described below); but it also means that those using
>> +     * qemu-traditional will *not* experience any change; and it also
>> +     * means that there is a work-around for those using qemu-xen,
>> +     * namely switching to qemu-traditional.
>> +     *
>> +     * If we defaulted to 0, and failing to resize the hole caused any
>> +     * problems with qemu-traditional, then there is no work-around.
>> +     *
>> +     * Since xend can't talk to qemu-traditional, I think this is the
> qemu-xen?

Oops, good catch. :-)

  -George