similar to: VPIO device model for Xen guests

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> Index: 2008-09-19/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c =================================================================== --- 2008-09-19.orig/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c 2008-09-19 14:12:02.000000000 +0200 +++ 2008-09-19/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c 2008-09-19 14:12:56.000000000 +0200 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ #include <xen/acpi.h>

From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> There are many hypercalls which make no sense or which are not supported on ARM systems but it''s not all that obvious which ones we do support. So lets try and document the hypercalls which are useful on ARM. I''m not sure this is the best way to go about this, I''m open to other ideas. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell

Any thoughts on setting breakpoints around hypercalls? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com> Date: Dec 26, 2005 12:14 AM Subject: setting breakpoints around hypercalls in a domU causes dom0 to lockup To: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Keir Fraser < Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> Stepping through hypercalls (at the source level, not

Shortly after I sent the first email, we found that there is another way to achieve this kind of communication, via KVM Hypercalls, I think they are underutilised in kvm, but they exist. We also found that they are architecture dependent, but the advantage is that one doesn't need to create QEMU<-> kvm interface So from our point of view it is either have things easily compatible with

Impact: potential bugfix In theory, the kernel could reuse the same page as pgdir for a new process while the hypervisor keeps it cached. This would have undesirable results. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> --- arch/x86/include/asm/lguest_hcall.h | 1 + arch/x86/lguest/boot.c | 8 ++++++++ drivers/lguest/hypercalls.c | 3 +++

Impact: potential bugfix In theory, the kernel could reuse the same page as pgdir for a new process while the hypervisor keeps it cached. This would have undesirable results. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> --- arch/x86/include/asm/lguest_hcall.h | 1 + arch/x86/lguest/boot.c | 8 ++++++++ drivers/lguest/hypercalls.c | 3 +++

(CCed to xen-devel for completeness. ;) On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 17:24 +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote: > I am porting xen-ppc''s xencomm to xen/ia64. > Currently on xen/ia64 copy_from/to_guest uses guest virtual address. This > works well as long as the virtual addresses are in the TLB. When not in TLB > (or vTLB) the hypercall can''t success without domain help. The

Hi, on ia64, the do_* functions for hypercalls are called in C. However, they are not declared in any .h file. I think it is cleaner to declare them in an header file rather than locally. The question is in which header file. Thank you for any suggestion. The do_* functions are at least: extern long do_ni_hypercall(void); extern long do_dom0_op(dom0_op_t *u_dom0_op); extern long

I was following an email chain in the xen mailing list on HVM hypercalls on grant tables and the email chain link is below http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2007-03/msg00688.html This link says that we need not required hypercalls to share memory b/w HVM''s. But as far as my understanding of sharing memory is concerned, I think the memory is shared using grant table

Hi, I implemented my own Hypercall in xen. Now I wish my application under dom0 could talk to Xen via my hypercall. Currently, I make a stub in dom0''s kernel, which works as a proxy to forward the request. So, my application first makes a system call to dom0, which then makes hypercall to xen. Is this design necessary? May I call hypercalls from user application under dom0 directly?

This series forms the kvm host part of paravirtual spinlock based against kvm tree. Please refer to https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/9/265 for kvm guest and Xen, x86 part merged to -tip spinlocks. Please note that: kvm uapi: Add KICK_CPU and PV_UNHALT definition to uapi is a common patch for both guest and host. Changes since V12: fold the patch 3 into patch 2 for bisection. (Eric Northup)

This series forms the kvm host part of paravirtual spinlock based against kvm tree. Please refer to https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/9/265 for kvm guest and Xen, x86 part merged to -tip spinlocks. Please note that: kvm uapi: Add KICK_CPU and PV_UNHALT definition to uapi is a common patch for both guest and host. Changes since V12: fold the patch 3 into patch 2 for bisection. (Eric Northup)

This series forms the kvm host part of paravirtual spinlock based against kvm tree. Please refer https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/178 for kvm guest part of the series. Please note that: kvm uapi: Add KICK_CPU and PV_UNHALT definition to uapi is a common patch for both guest and host. Srivatsa Vaddagiri (1): kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks

This series forms the kvm host part of paravirtual spinlock based against kvm tree. Please refer https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/6/178 for kvm guest part of the series. Please note that: kvm uapi: Add KICK_CPU and PV_UNHALT definition to uapi is a common patch for both guest and host. Srivatsa Vaddagiri (1): kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor to support pv-ticketlocks

While looking at the origin of very frequently executed hypercalls (as usual, kernel builds are what''s being measured), I realized that the high page accessor functions in Linux would be good candidates to handle in the hypervisor - clearing or copying to/from a high page is a pretty frequent operation (provided there''s enough memory). However, the measured results

Modify the cpufreq ondemand governor so that it can get idle and total ticks from the Xen hypervisor. Linux and Xen have different ideas of what an idle tick is, so the Xen values for both have to be returned in the same platform hypercall. Signed-off-by: Mark Langsdorf <mark.langsdorf@amd.com> diff -r b4278beaf354 xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c --- a/xen/arch/x86/platform_hypercall.c

Does anyone know what is the latest version of dom0-kernel, that supports fully xenpm hypercalls? I tried from 3.0 to 3.3 with xen-4.1.3, but none of them has xenpm working. On the other hand native kernel cpufreq is OK with all of them. My CPU is Xeon family 6 on PowerEdge 1950 III box. Regards, Dimitar Kazakov

Does anyone know what is the latest version of dom0-kernel, that supports fully xenpm hypercalls? I tried from 3.0 to 3.3 with xen-4.1.3, but none of them has xenpm working. On the other hand native kernel cpufreq is OK with all of them. My CPU is Xeon family 6 on PowerEdge 1950 III box. Regards, Dimitar Kazakov

While looking at the origin of very frequently executed hypercalls I realized that the high page accessor functions in Linux would be good candidates to handle in the hypervisor - clearing or copying to/from a high page is a pretty frequent operation (provided there''s enough memory in the domain). While prior to the first submission I only measured kernel builds (where the results are not

KVM_HC_KICK_CPU hypercall added to wakeup halted vcpu in paravirtual spinlock enabled guest. KVM_FEATURE_PV_UNHALT enables guest to check whether pv spinlock can be enabled in guest. Thanks Vatsa for rewriting KVM_HC_KICK_CPU Cc: Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa at linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt at