From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boris Ostrovsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 04/12] xen/hvmlite: Bootstrap HVMlite guest Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:58:56 -0500 Message-ID: <56A959C0.70103__17068.5871890329$1453939250$gmane$org@oracle.com> References: <20160126203023.GI20964@wotan.suse.de> <56A7EA6A.2030502@oracle.com> <20160127000435.GK20964@wotan.suse.de> <20160127144240.GB552@char.us.oracle.com> <56A8D93C.6040304@citrix.com> <56A8DCFD.6040603@oracle.com> <56A8DDAA.1010205@citrix.com> <56A8DFA4.5000801@oracle.com> <20160127152950.GH552@char.us.oracle.com> <56A8ED0D.5030002@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1aOZzJ-0006kp-LN for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 23:59:01 +0000 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: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Takashi Iwai , Avi Kivity , Joerg Roedel , "H. Peter Anvin" , Borislav Petkov , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Andy Lutomirski , Andrew Cooper Cc: Juergen Gross , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Rusty Russell , X86 ML , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , David Vrabel , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 01/27/2016 02:00 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> Worth mentioning here also is hpa's clarification on when subarch type >> PC (0) should be used: [it should be used if the hardware is] >> "enumerable using standard PC mechanisms (PCI, ACPI) and doesn't need >> a special boot flow" -- does that fit HVMLite's description so far? If >> so then The Xen subarch may need to be redefined as well to be clear >> what it means. I don't think we need to be precise but at the very >> least cover grounds to enable the definitions to meet its actual use >> to not confuse users. > Another thing to consider for HVMlite is that if the 0 subarch (PC) is > used in light of my linker table work and x86's use of it with the > subarch and supported subarch bitmask, is that it would also mean > HVMLite would run all routines currently pegged as needing PC type > (the current KVM and bare metal path) and it would mean not running > anything only pegged with Xen subarch type (but note that today Xen > doesn't even set the subarch type). If there is nothing in common > between PV and HVMlite (no x86 init calls to share), and if HVMLite > *can* call *alllllllll* PC init calls, then by all means this is fine, Yes, that's the idea. HVMlite jumps to startup_32|64 from the stub and runs from there with subarch 0. -boris > and if we just need to distinguish stuff between PC types that's fine, > it may still be possible to further extend hypervisor_type to the x86 > init calls I'm adding as another supported_hyper_types to ensure even > though a subarch is being used, that we also check the supported > hypervisor type as well. > > Luis