From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: "Stefano Stabellini" <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 2/5] xen: extend XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping to handle memory policy
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 01:48:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5D09E8CB020000780023987F@prv1-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190618232019.26425-2-sstabellini@kernel.org>
>>> On 19.06.19 at 01:20, <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote:
> --- a/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
> +++ b/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
> @@ -2070,6 +2070,7 @@ int xc_domain_memory_mapping(
> domctl.cmd = XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping;
> domctl.domain = domid;
> domctl.u.memory_mapping.add_mapping = add_mapping;
> + domctl.u.memory_mapping.memory_policy = 0;
Why not MEMORY_POLICY_DEFAULT?
> --- a/xen/common/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/common/domctl.c
> @@ -928,6 +928,7 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) u_domctl)
> unsigned long mfn_end = mfn + nr_mfns - 1;
> int add = op->u.memory_mapping.add_mapping;
> p2m_type_t p2mt;
> + uint32_t memory_policy = op->u.memory_mapping.memory_policy;
I can't see the need for a fixed-width type here.
> @@ -958,9 +959,28 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) u_domctl)
> if ( add )
> {
> printk(XENLOG_G_DEBUG
> - "memory_map:add: dom%d gfn=%lx mfn=%lx nr=%lx\n",
> - d->domain_id, gfn, mfn, nr_mfns);
> + "memory_map:add: dom%d gfn=%lx mfn=%lx nr=%lx cache=%u\n",
> + d->domain_id, gfn, mfn, nr_mfns, memory_policy);
Why "cache=" when it's a "policy" value?
> + switch ( memory_policy )
> + {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM
> + case MEMORY_POLICY_ARM_MEM_WB:
> + p2mt = p2m_mmio_direct_c;
> + break;
> + case MEMORY_POLICY_ARM_DEV_nGnRE:
> + p2mt = p2m_mmio_direct_dev;
> + break;
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86
> + case MEMORY_POLICY_X86_UC_MINUS:
FTR - I could certainly live with this becoming MEMORY_POLICY_DEFAULT
for now, if that's really what Andrew prefers for x86.
> --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> @@ -571,12 +571,33 @@ struct xen_domctl_bind_pt_irq {
> */
> #define DPCI_ADD_MAPPING 1
> #define DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING 0
> +/*
> + * Default memory policy. Corresponds to:
> + * Arm: MEMORY_POLICY_ARM_DEV_nGnRE
> + * x86: MEMORY_POLICY_X86_UC_MINUS
> + */
> +#define MEMORY_POLICY_DEFAULT 0
> +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
> +/* x86 only. Memory type UNCACHABLE */
> +# define MEMORY_POLICY_X86_UC_MINUS 0
> +#elif defined(__arm__) || defined (__aarch64__)
> +/* Arm only. Outer Shareable, Device-nGnRE memory (Device Memory on Armv7)
> */
> +# define MEMORY_POLICY_ARM_DEV_nGnRE 0
> +/* Arm only. Outer Shareable, Outer/Inner Write-Back Cacheable memory */
> +# define MEMORY_POLICY_ARM_MEM_WB 1
> +/*
> + * On ARM, MEMORY_POLICY selects the stage-2 memory attributes, but note
Further up it's Arm - why all upper case here?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-19 7:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-18 23:20 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 0/5] iomem memory policy Stefano Stabellini
2019-06-18 23:20 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 1/5] xen: add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions Stefano Stabellini
2019-06-19 7:42 ` Jan Beulich
2019-08-06 23:05 ` Stefano Stabellini
2019-07-10 17:17 ` Julien Grall
2019-08-06 23:38 ` Stefano Stabellini
2019-08-07 10:35 ` Julien Grall
2019-06-18 23:20 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 2/5] xen: extend XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping to handle memory policy Stefano Stabellini
2019-06-19 7:48 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2019-08-06 23:57 ` Stefano Stabellini
2019-07-10 17:39 ` Julien Grall
2019-08-06 23:42 ` Stefano Stabellini
2019-06-18 23:20 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 3/5] libxc: introduce xc_domain_mem_map_policy Stefano Stabellini
2019-06-18 23:20 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 4/5] libxl/xl: add memory policy option to iomem Stefano Stabellini
2019-07-10 19:02 ` Julien Grall
2019-06-18 23:20 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 5/5] xen/arm: clarify the support status of iomem configurations Stefano Stabellini
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=5D09E8CB020000780023987F@prv1-mh.provo.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=julien.grall@arm.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=stefanos@xilinx.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/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).