From: "Yu, Zhang" <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>,
George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>,
Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
"Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xen.org>,
"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
"zhiyuan.lv@intel.com" <zhiyuan.lv@intel.com>,
"jun.nakajima@intel.com" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 21:48:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45e6108d-c374-e7fc-b266-b3a59ca9170e@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ee1e731b8b8b4dc7adcbf0541e0e9676@AMSPEX02CL03.citrite.net>
On 4/21/2016 9:31 PM, Paul Durrant wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Yu, Zhang [mailto:yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com]
>> Sent: 21 April 2016 13:25
>> To: George Dunlap; Paul Durrant; Jan Beulich; Wei Liu
>> Cc: Kevin Tian; Keir (Xen.org); Andrew Cooper; Tim (Xen.org); xen-
>> devel@lists.xen.org; zhiyuan.lv@intel.com; jun.nakajima@intel.com
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename
>> p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/21/2016 1:06 AM, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 20/04/16 17:58, Paul Durrant wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf
>> Of Jan
>>>>> Beulich
>>>>> Sent: 20 April 2016 17:53
>>>>> To: George Dunlap; Paul Durrant; Wei Liu; yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com
>>>>> Cc: Kevin Tian; Keir (Xen.org); Andrew Cooper; Tim (Xen.org); xen-
>>>>> devel@lists.xen.org; zhiyuan.lv@intel.com; jun.nakajima@intel.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename
>>>>> p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com> 04/20/16 6:30 PM >>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:02 PM, George Dunlap
>>>>> <george.dunlap@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/04/16 12:02, Yu, Zhang wrote:
>>>>>>>> So I suppose the only place we need change for this patch is
>>>>>>>> for hvmmem_type_t, which should be defined like this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> typedef enum {
>>>>>>>> HVMMEM_ram_rw, /* Normal read/write guest RAM */
>>>>>>>> HVMMEM_ram_ro, /* Read-only; writes are discarded */
>>>>>>>> HVMMEM_mmio_dm, /* Reads and write go to the device
>>>>> model */
>>>>>>>> #if __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__ >= 0x00040700
>>>>>>>> HVMMEM_ioreq_server
>>>>>>>> #else
>>>>>>>> HVMMEM_mmio_write_dm
>>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>>> } hvmmem_type_t;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Besides, does 4.7 still accept freeze exception? It would be great
>>>>>>>> if we can get an approval for this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wait, do we *actually* need this? Is anyone actually using this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd say remove it, and if anyone complains, *then* do the #ifdef'ery
>> as
>>>>>>> a bug-fix. I'm pretty sure that's Linux's policy -- You Must Keep
>>>>>>> Userspace Working, but you can break it to see if anyone complains
>> first.
>>>>>
>>>>> We don't normally do it like that - we aim at keeping things compatible
>>>>> right away. I don't know of a case where we would have knowingly
>> broken
>>>>> compatibility for users of the public headers (leaving aside tool stack only
>>>>> stuff of course).
>>>>>
>>>>>> Going further than this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The proposed patch series not only changes the name, it changes the
>>>>>> functionality. We do not want code to *compile* against 4.7 and then
>>>>>> not *work* against 4.7; and the worst of all is to compile and sort of
>>>>>> work but do it incorrectly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I had the impression that the renaming patch was what it is - a renaming
>>>>> patch, without altering behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Does the ioreq server have a way of asking Xen what version of the ABI
>>>>>> it's providing? I'm assuming the answer is "no"; in which case code
>>>>>> that is compiled against the 4.6 interface but run on a 4.8 interface
>>>>>> that looks like this will fail in a somewhat unpredictable way.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only thing it can do is ask for the Xen version. The ABI version is not
>>>>> being returned by anything (but perhaps should be).
>>>>>
>>>>>> Given that:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. When we do check the ioreq server functionality in, what's the
>>>>>> correct way to deal with code that wants to use the old interface, and
>>>>>> what do we do with code compiled against the old interface but
>> running
>>>>>> on the new one?
>>>>>
>>>>> For the full series I'm not sure I can really tell.But as said, for the rename
>>>>> patch alone I thought it is just a rename. And that's what we want to get
>>>>> in (see Paul's earlier reply - he wants to see the old name gone, so it
>> won't
>>>>> be used any further).
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. What's the best thing to do for this release?
>>>>>
>>>>> If the entire series (no matter whether to go in now or later) is changing
>>>>> behavior, then the only choice is to consider the currently used enum
>>>>> value burnt, and use a fresh one for the new semantics.
>>>>
>>>> It sounds like that would be best way. If we don't so that then we have to
>> maintain the write-dm semantics for pages of that type unless the type is
>> claimed (by using the new hypercall) and that's bit icky. I much prefer that
>> pages of the new type are treated as RAM until claimed.
>>>
>>> I think the only sensible way to keep the enum is to also keep the
>>> functionality, which would mean using *another* p2m type for
>> ioreq_server.
>>>
>>> Given that the functionality isn't going away for 4.7, I don't see an
>>> urgent need to remove the enum; but if Paul does, then a patch renaming
>>> it to HVMMEM_unused would be the way forward then I guess. Once the
>>> underlying p2m type goes away, you'll want to return -EINVAL for this
>>> enum value.
>>>
>>
>> So the enum would be sth. like this?
>>
>> typedef enum {
>> HVMMEM_ram_rw, /* Normal read/write guest RAM */
>> HVMMEM_ram_ro, /* Read-only; writes are discarded */
>> HVMMEM_mmio_dm, /* Reads and write go to the device model */
>> #if __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__ < 0x00040700
>> HVMMEM_mmio_write_dm, /* Read-only; writes go to the device model
>> */
>> #else
>> HVMMEM_unused,
>> #endif
>> HVMMEM_ioreq_server
>> } hvmmem_type_t;
>>
>
> I believe that's correct, but presumably there's need to be a change to the hypervisor since any reference there to HVMMEM_mmio_write_dm (which I think is limited to the get and set mem type code in hvm.c) will now need to map HVMMEM_unused to the old p2m_mmio_write_dm type.
>
Thank you, Paul.
But p2m_mmio_write_dm will not exist any more...
E.g. if in hvmop_get_mem_type(), if type 0xf(p2m_ioreq_server) is
returned, we could just return HVMMEM_ioreq_server. No need to
worry about the HVMMEM_mmio_write_dm.
Maybe we only need to change the beginning of hvmop_set_mem_type()
to sth. like this:
/* Interface types to internal p2m types */
static const p2m_type_t memtype[] = {
[HVMMEM_ram_rw] = p2m_ram_rw,
[HVMMEM_ram_ro] = p2m_ram_ro,
[HVMMEM_mmio_dm] = p2m_mmio_dm,
[HVMMEM_unused] = p2m_invalid, /* this will be rejected later */
[HVMMEM_ioreq_server] = p2m_ioreq_server
};
and later in the same routine, just reject the HVMMEM_unused type, in
an if(with unlikely) statement.
> Paul
B.R.
Yu
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-21 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-31 10:53 [PATCH v2 0/3] x86/ioreq server: introduce HVMMEM_ioreq_server mem type Yu Zhang
2016-03-31 10:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/ioreq server: Add new functions to get/set memory types Yu Zhang
2016-04-05 13:57 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-05 14:08 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-08 13:25 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-03-31 10:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server Yu Zhang
2016-04-05 14:38 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-08 13:26 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-04-08 21:48 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-18 8:41 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-18 9:10 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-18 9:14 ` Wei Liu
2016-04-18 9:45 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-18 16:40 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-18 16:45 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-18 16:47 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-18 16:58 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 11:02 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 11:15 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 11:38 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 11:50 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 16:51 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-20 14:59 ` Wei Liu
2016-04-20 15:02 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-20 16:30 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-20 16:52 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-20 16:58 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-20 17:06 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-20 17:09 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-21 12:24 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-21 13:31 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-21 13:48 ` Yu, Zhang [this message]
2016-04-21 13:56 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-21 14:09 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-20 17:08 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-21 12:04 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-03-31 10:53 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] x86/ioreq server: Add HVMOP to map guest ram with p2m_ioreq_server to an ioreq server Yu Zhang
[not found] ` <20160404082556.GC28633@deinos.phlegethon.org>
2016-04-05 6:01 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-06 17:13 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-07 7:01 ` Yu, Zhang
[not found] ` <CAFLBxZbLp2zWzCzQTaJNWbanQSmTJ57ZyTh0qaD-+YUn8o8pyQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-04-08 10:39 ` George Dunlap
[not found] ` <5707839F.9060803@linux.intel.com>
2016-04-08 11:01 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-11 11:15 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-14 10:45 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-18 15:57 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 9:11 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 9:21 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 9:44 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 10:05 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 11:17 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 11:47 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 11:59 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-20 14:50 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-20 14:57 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-20 15:37 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-20 16:30 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-20 16:58 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-21 13:28 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-21 13:21 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-22 11:27 ` Wei Liu
2016-04-22 11:30 ` George Dunlap
2016-04-19 4:37 ` Tian, Kevin
2016-04-19 9:21 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-08 13:33 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-04-11 11:14 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-11 12:20 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-04-11 16:25 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-08 22:28 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-11 11:14 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-11 16:31 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-12 9:37 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-12 15:08 ` Jan Beulich
2016-04-14 9:56 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 4:50 ` Tian, Kevin
2016-04-19 8:46 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 9:27 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 9:40 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 9:49 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 10:01 ` Paul Durrant
2016-04-19 9:54 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 9:15 ` Yu, Zhang
2016-04-19 9:23 ` Paul Durrant
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=45e6108d-c374-e7fc-b266-b3a59ca9170e@linux.intel.com \
--to=yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=Paul.Durrant@citrix.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
--cc=zhiyuan.lv@intel.com \
/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).