From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5504C43331 for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:52:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E5A8206F5 for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:52:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9E5A8206F5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jKNff-0007L4-Np; Fri, 03 Apr 2020 14:51:47 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jKNfe-0007KX-Qi for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2020 14:51:46 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: a3977088-75ba-11ea-bd2a-12813bfff9fa Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id a3977088-75ba-11ea-bd2a-12813bfff9fa; Fri, 03 Apr 2020 14:51:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6C88AC62; Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:51:44 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 09/12] xen: add runtime parameter access support to hypfs To: Juergen Gross References: <20200402154616.16927-1-jgross@suse.com> <20200402154616.16927-10-jgross@suse.com> From: Jan Beulich Message-ID: Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:51:42 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200402154616.16927-10-jgross@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Tian , Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Jun Nakajima , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Volodymyr Babchuk , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 02.04.2020 17:46, Juergen Gross wrote: > V7: > - fine tune some parameter initializations (Jan Beulich) > - call custom_runtime_set_var() after updating the value > - modify alignment in Arm linker script to 4 (Jan Beulich) I didn't ask for this to be unilaterally 4 - I don't think this would work on Arm64, seeing that there are pointers inside the struct. This wants to be pointer size, i.e. 4 for Arm32 but 8 for Arm64. > --- a/docs/misc/hypfs-paths.pandoc > +++ b/docs/misc/hypfs-paths.pandoc > @@ -152,3 +152,12 @@ The major version of Xen. > #### /buildinfo/version/minor = INTEGER > > The minor version of Xen. > + > +#### /params/ > + > +A directory of runtime parameters. > + > +#### /params/* > + > +The individual parameters. The description of the different parameters can be > +found in `docs/misc/xen-command-line.pandoc`. Is .pandoc a useful specification here, or do such extensions get converted when rendering into different formats? > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmcs.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmcs.c > @@ -70,6 +70,30 @@ integer_param("ple_window", ple_window); > static bool __read_mostly opt_ept_pml = true; > static s8 __read_mostly opt_ept_ad = -1; > int8_t __read_mostly opt_ept_exec_sp = -1; > +static char opt_ept_setting[24]; > + > +static void update_ept_param_append(const char *str, int val) > +{ > + char *pos = opt_ept_setting + strlen(opt_ept_setting); > + > + snprintf(pos, sizeof(opt_ept_setting) - (pos - opt_ept_setting), > + ",%s=%d", str, val); > +} > + > +static void update_ept_param(void) > +{ > + snprintf(opt_ept_setting, sizeof(opt_ept_setting), "pml=%d", opt_ept_pml); > + if ( opt_ept_ad >= 0 ) > + update_ept_param_append("ad", opt_ept_ad); With the new patch 1, is the if() here really still needed? Then again, only "exec-sp" is a runtime sub-parameter anyway afaict, and hence I'd expect only that part of the option should be displayed (I'm sorry for not having paid attention to this earlier). Jan