Re: [PATCH v1 04/12] xen/hvmlite: Bootstrap HVMlite guest

From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@gmail.com>
Cc: "Juergen Gross" <jgross@suse.com>,
	"Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@goop.org>,
	"X86 ML" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"Rusty Russell" <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@amacapital.net>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@suse.de>,
	"Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 04/12] xen/hvmlite: Bootstrap HVMlite guest
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 15:09:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56A8DDAA.1010205__27200.9527580396$1453908105$gmane$org@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A8DCFD.6040603@oracle.com>

On 27/01/16 15:06, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 09:50 AM, David Vrabel wrote:
>> On 27/01/16 14:42, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 08:54:56PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>>> On Jan 26, 2016 6:16 PM, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@suse.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> You go:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> hvmlite_start_xen() -->
>>>>>>          HVM stub
>>>>>>          startup_64() | (startup_32()
>>>>> Hrm, does HVMlite work well with load_ucode_bsp(), note the patches to
>>>>> rebrand pv_enabled() to pv_legacy() or whatever, this PV type will not
>>>>> be legacy or crap / old, so we'd need a way to catch it if we should
>>>>> not use that code for this PV type. This begs the question, are you
>>>>> also sure other callers in startup_32() or startup_64() might be OK as
>>>>> well where previously guarded with pv_enabled() ?
>>>> Actually this call can't be used, and if early code used it prior to
>>>> setup_arch() it'd be a bug as its only properly set until later.
>>>> Vetting
>>>> for correctness of all code call is still required though and
>>>> perhaps we do
>>>> need something to catch now this PV type on early code such as this
>>>> one if
>>>> we don't want it. From what I've gathered before on other bsp ucode we
>>>> don't want ucode loaded for PV guest types through these mechanisms.
>>> It may help to not think of PVH/hvmlite as PV. It really is HVM with
>>> a lot
>>> of emulated devices removed.
>>>
>>> How does early microcode work on EFI? Does the EFI stub code have an
>>> early
>>> microcode loading code ?
>> Surely the interesting comparison here is how is (early) microcode
>> loading disabled in KVM guests?  We should use the same mechanism for
           ^^^^^^^^
>> HVMlite guests.
> 
> 
> Why would we ever want to have a guest load microcode during boot? I can
> see how a (privileged) guest may want to load microcode from a shell
> (via microcode driver).

I think you missed a word when you read my reply.

David