From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Yu, Zhang" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tools: introduce parameter max_ranges. Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:02:39 +0800 Message-ID: <569F14EF.9040108@linux.intel.com> References: <1453195678-25944-1-git-send-email-yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com> <1453195678-25944-4-git-send-email-yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com> <20160119115349.GV1691@citrix.com> <7a1e981ca15b491e878fb32287f5ea7a@AMSPEX02CL03.citrite.net> <20160119143725.GI1691@citrix.com> <968fc8fc8f824ee7903fe7c8cbb7b5c0@AMSPEX02CL03.citrite.net> <20160119150400.GK1691@citrix.com> <1453216725.29930.84.camel@citrix.com> <569F0008.1010201@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: "Tian, Kevin" , Ian Campbell , Wei Liu , Paul Durrant Cc: "Keir (Xen.org)" , Andrew Cooper , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Stefano Stabellini , "Lv, Zhiyuan" , "jbeulich@suse.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 1/20/2016 11:58 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote: >> From: Yu, Zhang [mailto:yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:33 AM >>> As a feature this write-protection has nothing to be GPU virtualization specific. >>> In the future the same mediated pass-through idea used in XenGT may be >>> used on other I/O devices which need to shadow some structure w/ requirement >>> to write-protect guest memory. So it's not good to tie this to either XenGT >>> or GTT. >>> >> Thank you, Kevin. >> Well, if this parameter is not supposed to be xengt specific, we do not >> need to connect it with any xengt flag such as ."vgt=1" or "GVT-g=1". >> Hence the user will have to configure the max_wp_ram_ranges himself, >> right? >> > > Not always. The option can be configured manually by the user, or > automatically set in the code when "vgt=1" is recognized. OK. That sounds more reasonable. :) To give a summary, I'll do the following changes in next version: 1> rename this new parameter to "max_wp_ram_ranges", then use this parameter as the wp-ram rangeset limit, for the I/O rangeset, keep MAX_NR_IO_RANGES as its limit; 2> clear the documentation part; 3> define a LIBXL_HAVE_XXX in libxl.h to indicate a new field in the build info; 4> We do not introduce the xengt flag by now, and will add code to automatically set the "max_wp_ram_ranges" after this flag is accepted in the future. Does anyone have more suggestions? :) B.R. Yu > > Thanks > Kevin >