Re: HVMLite / PVHv2 - using x86 EFI boot entry

From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>
Cc: "Matt Fleming" <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
	"Michael Chang" <MChang@suse.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Julien Grall" <julien.grall@arm.com>,
	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, "Vojtěch Pavlík" <vojtech@suse.cz>,
	"Gary Lin" <GLin@suse.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	"Jeffrey Cheung" <JCheung@suse.com>,
	"Charles Arndol" <carnold@suse.com>,
	"Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
	joeyli <jlee@suse.com>, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
	"Boris Ostrovsky" <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	"Juergen Gross" <jgross@suse.com>,
	"Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"Jim Fehlig" <jfehlig@suse.com>,
	"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@amacapital.net>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	david.vrabel@citrix.com, "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: HVMLite / PVHv2 - using x86 EFI boot entry
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2016 19:02:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160409170218.GC1990__1627.13444228775$1460221431$gmane$org@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160406111130.GG3489@olila.local.net-space.pl>

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:11:30PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 04:40:27AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Boris sent out the first HVMLite series of patches to add a new Xen guest type
> > February 1, 2016 [0]. We've been talking off list with a few folks now over
> > the prospect of instead of adding yet-another-boot-entry we instead fixate
> > HVMLite to use the x86 EFI boot entry. There's a series of reasons to consider
> > this, likewise there are reasons to question the effort required and if its
> > really needed. We'd like some more public review of this proposal, and see if
> > others can come up with other ideas, both in favor or against this proposal.
> >
> > This in particular is also a good time to get x86 Linux folks to chime on on
> > the general design proposal of HVMLite design, given that outside of the boot
> > entry discussion it would seem including myself that we didn't get the memo
> > over the proposed architecture review [1]. At least on my behalf perhaps the
> > only sticking thorns of the design was the new boot entry, which came to me
> > as a surprise, and this thread addresses and the lack of addressing semantics
> > for early boot (which we may seem to need to address; some of this is being
> > addressing in parallels through other work). The HVMLite document talks about
> > using ACPI_FADT_NO_VGA -- we don't use this yet upstream but I have some pending
> > changes which should make it easy to integrate its use on HVMLite. Perhaps
> > there are others that may have some other points they may want to raise now...
> >
> > A huge summary of the discussion over EFI boot option for HVMLite is now on a
> > wiki [2], below I'll just provide the outline of the discussion. Consider this a
> > request for more public review, feel free to take any of the items below and
> > elaborate on it as you see fit.
> >
> > Worth mentioning also is that this topic will be discussed at the 2016 Xen
> > Hackathon April 18-19 [3] at the ARM Cambridge, UK Headquarters so if you can
> > attend and this topic interests you, consider attending.
> 
> I hope that you will be there as one of the biggest proponents of EFI entry point.
> If you does not it will be difficult or impossible to discuss this issue without you.
> In the worst case I can raise this topic on behalf of you and then we should organize
> phone call if possible (and accepted by others). However, to do that I must know your
> plans in advance.

I'll be there!

  Luis

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel