From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Chen, Tiejun" Subject: Re: [v7][RFC][PATCH 01/13] xen: RMRR fix Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:53:58 +0800 Message-ID: <5452F9C6.20802@intel.com> References: <1414136077-18599-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com> <20141030221521.GA69781@deinos.phlegethon.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141030221521.GA69781@deinos.phlegethon.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Tim Deegan Cc: yang.z.zhang@intel.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, JBeulich@suse.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 2014/10/31 6:15, Tim Deegan wrote: > Hi, > > At 15:34 +0800 on 24 Oct (1414161264), Tiejun Chen wrote: >> This series of patches try to reconcile those remaining problems but >> just post as RFC to ask for any comments to refine everything. >> >> The current whole scheme is as follows: >> >> 1. Reconcile guest mmio with RMRR in pci_setup >> 2. Reconcile guest RAM with RMRR in e820 table >> >> Then in theory guest wouldn't access any RMRR range. >> >> 3. Just initialize all RMRR ranges as p2m_access_n in p2m table: >> gfn:mfn:p2m_access_n > > Please don't use p2m_access for this. It will conflict with other > users of that interface. Just clear the entries instead (i.e. set to > p2m_type_invalid). Then you don't need to do this either: IMO all p2m tables are initialized as invalid. Furthermore, so I guess you also may agree something discussed between Jan and me. There Jan think we just reject any attempt to populate these ranges. Thanks Tiejun > >> 5. Before we take real device assignment, any access to RMRR may issue >> ept_handle_violation because of p2m_access_n. Then we just call >> update_guest_eip() to return. > > because the RMRR area will be handled like any other un-backed address. > > Cheers, > > Tim. >