From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/20] PVH xen: Miscellaneous changes
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 12:53:00 +0100
Message-ID: <5193933C02000078000D66CD@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
References: <1368579168-30829-1-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
	<1368579168-30829-17-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1368579168-30829-17-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 15.05.13 at 02:52, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c
> @@ -64,9 +64,10 @@ long domctl_memory_mapping(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn,
>  
>      if ( add_map )
>      {
> -        printk(XENLOG_G_INFO
> -               "memory_map:add: dom%d gfn=%lx mfn=%lx nr=%lx\n",
> -               d->domain_id, gfn, mfn, nr_mfns);
> +        if ( !is_pvh_domain(d) )     /* PVH maps lots and lots */
> +            printk(XENLOG_G_INFO
> +                   "memory_map:add: dom%d gfn=%lx mfn=%lx nr=%lx\n",
> +                   d->domain_id, gfn, mfn, nr_mfns);
>  
>          ret = iomem_permit_access(d, mfn, mfn + nr_mfns - 1);
>          if ( !ret && paging_mode_translate(d) )
> @@ -91,9 +92,10 @@ long domctl_memory_mapping(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn,
>      }
>      else
>      {
> -        printk(XENLOG_G_INFO
> -               "memory_map:remove: dom%d gfn=%lx mfn=%lx nr=%lx\n",
> -               d->domain_id, gfn, mfn, nr_mfns);
> +        if ( !is_pvh_domain(d) )     /* PVH unmaps lots and lots */
> +            printk(XENLOG_G_INFO
> +                   "memory_map:remove: dom%d gfn=%lx mfn=%lx nr=%lx\n",
> +                   d->domain_id, gfn, mfn, nr_mfns);
>  
>          if ( paging_mode_translate(d) )
>              for ( i = 0; i < nr_mfns; i++ )

Are these changes still necessary? IOW why would a PVH guest be
mapping so much more MMIO memory than a PV one?

> @@ -1304,6 +1306,11 @@ void arch_get_info_guest(struct vcpu *v, vcpu_guest_context_u c)
>              c.nat->gs_base_kernel = hvm_get_shadow_gs_base(v);
>          }
>      }
> +    else if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) )
> +    {
> +        /* pvh fixme: punt it to phase II */
> +        printk(XENLOG_WARNING "PVH: fixme: arch_get_info_guest()\n");
> +    }

Please at least clear out all state that doesn't get properly obtained
(short of being able to return an error).

Jan