From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: "Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
"Wei Liu" <wl@xen.org>, "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
"George Dunlap" <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
"Tim Deegan" <tim@xen.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3 0/3] x86: shim building adjustments (plus shadow follow-on)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:42:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d09b0690-c5e0-a90b-b4c0-4396a5f62c59@suse.com> (raw)
The change addressing the shadow related build issue noticed by
Andrew went in already. The build breakage goes beyond this
specific combination though - PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE plus HVM is
similarly an issue. This is what the 1st patch tries to take care
of, in a shape already on irc noticed to be controversial. I'm
submitting the change nevertheless because for the moment there
looks to be a majority in favor of going this route. One argument
not voiced there yet: What good does it do to allow a user to
enable HVM when then on the resulting hypervisor they still can't
run HVM guests (for the hypervisor still being a dedicated PV
shim one). On top of this, the alternative approach is likely
going to get ugly.
The shadow related adjustments are here merely because the want
to make them was noticed in the context of the patch which has
already gone in.
1: don't permit HVM and PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE at the same time
2: refactor shadow_vram_{get,put}_l1e()
3: sh_{make,destroy}_monitor_table() are "even more" HVM-only
Jan
next reply other threads:[~2020-10-19 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-19 8:42 Jan Beulich [this message]
2020-10-19 8:44 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] x86/shim: don't permit HVM and PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE at the same time Jan Beulich
2020-10-19 8:44 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] x86/shadow: refactor shadow_vram_{get,put}_l1e() Jan Beulich
2020-10-21 10:05 ` Roger Pau Monné
2020-10-29 20:15 ` Tim Deegan
2020-10-19 8:45 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] x86/shadow: sh_{make,destroy}_monitor_table() are "even more" HVM-only Jan Beulich
2020-10-21 10:45 ` Roger Pau Monné
2020-10-29 20:27 ` Tim Deegan
2020-10-29 13:40 ` Ping: [PATCH v3 0/3] x86: shim building adjustments (plus shadow follow-on) Jan Beulich
2020-10-29 20:53 ` Tim Deegan
2021-04-15 9:27 ` [PATCH v4] x86/shim: don't permit HVM and PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE at the same time Jan Beulich
2021-04-27 16:08 ` Ping: " Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d09b0690-c5e0-a90b-b4c0-4396a5f62c59@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.