Hi guys,
Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested
all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and
couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats
different in
each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now.
As before, they were built on top of
fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
thanks,
Mukesh
Stefano Stabellini
2012-Sep-24 15:16 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)u
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> Hi guys, > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > As before, they were built on top of > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.gitThe patch series is not in a bad state. It is reasonable to aim for a merge in 3.8. At least the xen_remap_domain_mfn_range, ballooning and privcmd changes, which interfaces are going to be shared with Xen on ARM ;-)
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 16:16 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > > > As before, they were built on top of > > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > The patch series is not in a bad state. It is reasonable to aim for a > merge in 3.8. > At least the xen_remap_domain_mfn_range, ballooning and privcmd changes, > which interfaces are going to be shared with Xen on ARM ;-)Indeed, I intend to rebase my ARM patches to use these ASAP, if not this week then when I get back from my long weekend vacation next week. Ian.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Sep-24 15:29 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)u
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 04:16:29PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > > > As before, they were built on top of > > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.gitI took them for a spin over the weekend and stuck them on top of my #linux-next - git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git linux-next-pvh which worked well as PV guest (dom0, domU, etc). It didn''t do too well as PVHVM guest, but that might be just that some of the ''if (xen..)'' are properly not set or I mismerged badly. The later is probably likely as I did screw it up at least twice (as you can see from my log). Hm, let me give them also a whirl on top of fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31> > The patch series is not in a bad state. It is reasonable to aim for a > merge in 3.8. > At least the xen_remap_domain_mfn_range, ballooning and privcmd changes, > which interfaces are going to be shared with Xen on ARM ;-)
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Sep-24 16:06 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)u
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:29:51AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 04:16:29PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > > > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > > > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > > > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > > > > > As before, they were built on top of > > > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > I took them for a spin over the weekend and stuck them on top of my > #linux-next - > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git linux-next-pvh > > which worked well as PV guest (dom0, domU, etc). It didn''t do too well > as PVHVM guest, but that might be just that some of the ''if (xen..)'' > are properly not set or I mismerged badly. The later is probably likely as > I did screw it up at least twice (as you can see from my log). > > Hm, let me give them also a whirl on top of fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31And with 3683243b2c551e58082b179fd153c7d43ddc503b applied on top of it I boots just fine. So I had to mess up the merge somehow.> > > > > The patch series is not in a bad state. It is reasonable to aim for a > > merge in 3.8. > > At least the xen_remap_domain_mfn_range, ballooning and privcmd changes, > > which interfaces are going to be shared with Xen on ARM ;-)
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> Hi guys, > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now.FYI I''ve actually read through all of them, I just didn''t have much to say because Stefano already said most of what I would have said. Ian.
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> Hi guys, > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission.Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S which declare the features which are used here as supported by the kernel image? Ian.
On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> Hi guys, > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > As before, they were built on top of > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.gitIs that correct? That''s this commit: commit fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 Merge: 44d82e2 1fcfd08 Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Date: Thu Aug 2 11:52:39 2012 -0700 Why so old? Makes it hard to take these for a spin due to the rebasing... Ian.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Sep-26 13:37 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 02:25:24PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:> On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > > > As before, they were built on top of > > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > Is that correct? That''s this commit: > > commit fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 > Merge: 44d82e2 1fcfd08 > Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > Date: Thu Aug 2 11:52:39 2012 -0700 > > Why so old? Makes it hard to take these for a spin due to the > rebasing...I rebased them on top v3.6-rc6 (look in #linux-next-pvh) but I must have done something wrong b/c it won''t boot as PVHVM. Time to do some git bisection and see where I failed.> > Ian.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Sep-26 14:46 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:37:36AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 02:25:24PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > > > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > > > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > > > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > > > > > As before, they were built on top of > > > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > > > Is that correct? That''s this commit: > > > > commit fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 > > Merge: 44d82e2 1fcfd08 > > Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > > Date: Thu Aug 2 11:52:39 2012 -0700 > > > > Why so old? Makes it hard to take these for a spin due to the > > rebasing... > > I rebased them on top v3.6-rc6 (look in #linux-next-pvh) but I must > have done something wrong b/c it won''t boot as PVHVM. Time to do some git > bisection and see where I failed.Culprit found. I''ve rebased and added some of my patches to the branch. They are on top of v3.6-rc6 + patches going in for v3.7. git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git linux-next-pvh
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 14:37 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 02:25:24PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. Tested > > > all the combinations. The patches are a bit smaller from before, and > > > couldn''t be separated like before, so I can''t state whats different in > > > each patch. But, it''s not too bad to review now. > > > > > > As before, they were built on top of > > > fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 from the following tree: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > > > Is that correct? That''s this commit: > > > > commit fc6bdb59a501740b28ed3b616641a22c8dc5dd31 > > Merge: 44d82e2 1fcfd08 > > Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> > > Date: Thu Aug 2 11:52:39 2012 -0700 > > > > Why so old? Makes it hard to take these for a spin due to the > > rebasing... > > I rebased them on top v3.6-rc6 (look in #linux-next-pvh)I found this, thanks.> but I must > have done something wrong b/c it won''t boot as PVHVM. Time to do some git > bisection and see where I failed.Ian.
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:> On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S which > declare the features which are used here as supported by the kernel > image? > > Ian. >Strange, adding following to head.S ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives?
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 22:28 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S which > > declare the features which are used here as supported by the kernel > > image? > > > > Ian. > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives?I have no idea, I can''t think of any way that xenstored would be able to even see the notes given in the dom0 kernel image. Are you sure you only that one exact change? Ian.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Oct-02 13:09 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S which > > declare the features which are used here as supported by the kernel > > image? > > > > Ian. > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives?What is XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH number? You might be re-using a value that is defined for a different purpose? Did you check the Xen hypervisor header files?
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:09:11 -0400 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:> On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 > > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > > > > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S > > > which declare the features which are used here as supported by > > > the kernel image? > > > > > > Ian. > > > > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives? > > What is XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH number? You might be re-using a value > that is defined for a different purpose? Did you check the Xen > hypervisor header files?Ah, right. I was looking at linux header file, which is behind xen. Thanks konrad. Mukesh
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 19:55 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:09:11 -0400 > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 02:28:26PM -0700, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 > > > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > > > > > > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S > > > > which declare the features which are used here as supported by > > > > the kernel image? > > > > > > > > Ian. > > > > > > > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > > > > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives? > > > > What is XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH number? You might be re-using a value > > that is defined for a different purpose? Did you check the Xen > > hypervisor header files? > > Ah, right. I was looking at linux header file, which is behind xen.Phew! You are going to add the other features which PVH uses too, right? Ian.
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 10:35:28 +0100 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 22:28 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 > > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > > > > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S > > > which declare the features which are used here as supported by > > > the kernel image? > > > > > > Ian. > > > > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives? > > I have no idea, I can''t think of any way that xenstored would be able > to even see the notes given in the dom0 kernel image. > > Are you sure you only that one exact change?You Ok with XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, or should I call it XEN_ELFNOTE_PV_EXTENSIONS. Please LMK. tanks Mukesh
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Oct-03 20:39 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 12:11:22PM -0700, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 10:35:28 +0100 > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 22:28 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:54:23 +0100 > > > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 20:12 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > > > Ok, I''ve made all the changes from prev RFC patch submission. > > > > > > > > Did I miss the patch with the changes to arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S > > > > which declare the features which are used here as supported by > > > > the kernel image? > > > > > > > > Ian. > > > > > > > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > > > > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives? > > > > I have no idea, I can''t think of any way that xenstored would be able > > to even see the notes given in the dom0 kernel image. > > > > Are you sure you only that one exact change? > > You Ok with XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, or should I call it > XEN_ELFNOTE_PV_EXTENSIONS. Please LMK.XEN_ELFNOTE_PVH_FEATURES ? That way you can fill it with different ''features'' flags if need to. Say 1<<1 is basic, etc.> > tanks > Mukesh
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 11:24:04 +0100 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:> On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 19:55 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:09:11 -0400 > > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: > >> >> > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > > > > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > > > > > > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives? > > > > > > What is XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH number? You might be re-using a > > > value that is defined for a different purpose? Did you check the > > > Xen hypervisor header files? > > > > Ah, right. I was looking at linux header file, which is behind xen. > > Phew! > > You are going to add the other features which PVH uses too, right? > > Ian. >Sorry, confused. Not very familiar with this. You mean, something like: ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PVH_FEATURES, .asciz "writable_page_tables|auto_translated_physmap|supervisor_mode_kernel|hvm_callback_vector") Something like this? thanks Mukesh
On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 21:39 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> > You Ok with XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, or should I call it > > XEN_ELFNOTE_PV_EXTENSIONS. Please LMK.My intention was that you add XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel et al. to the existing XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES note rather than adding a whole new note. I some how missed that this is what you were doing above. e.g. what I meant was: in Kconfig: config XEN_X86_PVH bool "Support for running as a PVH guest (EXPERIMENTAL)" depends X86_64 && <..etc..> && EXPERIMENTAL help This option enables support for running as a PVH guest (PV guest using hardware extensions) under a suitably capable hypervisor. This option is EXPERIMETNAL because the hypervisor interfaces which it uses are not yet considered stable therefore backwards and forwards compatibility is not yet guaranteed. If unsure, say N. Adjust the depends to suit reality. I thought we had that second paragraph for ARM too, but it seems like I was wrong, we should probably add it. then in xen-head.S (adjusted for features actually used by PVH): #ifdef CONFIG_XEN_X86_PVH #define FEATURES_PVH "XENFEAT_writable_descriptor_tables|" \ "XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap|" \ "XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel" \ "XENFEAT_hvm_callback_vector" #else #define FEATURES_PVH /* Not supported */ #endif ... ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES, .asciz "!writable_page_tables|pae_pgdir_above_4gb"FEATURES_PVH) ... I don''t think we need to define a XENFEAT_pvh (or whatever it might be called) since don''t need it in the code so there''s no need to define/use it here. If/when we need something like that we can add it, or preferably some more specific thing for the use case which crops up.> XEN_ELFNOTE_PVH_FEATURES ? > > That way you can fill it with different ''features'' flags > if need to. Say 1<<1 is basic, etc.I don''t think we need a PVH specific ELF note which just replicates the XENFEAT infrastructure at this stage, if we do come to that then it would be better to give PVH its own leaf in the existing feature space (e.g. starting at 1*32+0). Ian.
On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 23:26 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:> On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 11:24:04 +0100 > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 19:55 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:09:11 -0400 > > > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Strange, adding following to head.S > > > > > > > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PADDR_OFFSET, _ASM_PTR 0) > > > > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) <-------- > > > > > > > > > > and xenstore won''t start in dom0. What gives? > > > > > > > > What is XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH number? You might be re-using a > > > > value that is defined for a different purpose? Did you check the > > > > Xen hypervisor header files? > > > > > > Ah, right. I was looking at linux header file, which is behind xen. > > > > Phew! > > > > You are going to add the other features which PVH uses too, right? > > > > Ian. > > > > Sorry, confused. Not very familiar with this. You mean, something like: > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, .long 1) > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_PVH_FEATURES, .asciz "writable_page_tables|auto_translated_physmap|supervisor_mode_kernel|hvm_callback_vector") > > Something like this?Nearly, I meant to add them to the existing features note. I just replied to the previous mail with some more detail. Ian.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Oct-04 12:52 UTC
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8]: PVH (PV guest with extensions)
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:15 AM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:> On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 21:39 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >> > You Ok with XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, or should I call it >> > XEN_ELFNOTE_PV_EXTENSIONS. Please LMK. > > My intention was that you add XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel et al. to > the existing XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES note rather than adding a whole new > note. I some how missed that this is what you were doing above. e.g. > what I meant was: > > in Kconfig: > config XEN_X86_PVH > bool "Support for running as a PVH guest (EXPERIMENTAL)" > depends X86_64 && <..etc..> && EXPERIMENTAL > help > This option enables support for running as a PVH > guest (PV guest using hardware extensions) under > a suitably capable hypervisor. > > This option is EXPERIMETNAL because the > hypervisor interfaces which it uses are not yet > considered stable therefore backwards and > forwards compatibility is not yet guaranteed. > > If unsure, say N. > > Adjust the depends to suit reality. > > I thought we had that second paragraph for ARM too, but it seems like I > was wrong, we should probably add it. > > then in xen-head.S (adjusted for features actually used by PVH): > #ifdef CONFIG_XEN_X86_PVH > #define FEATURES_PVH "XENFEAT_writable_descriptor_tables|" \ > "XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap|" \ > "XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel" \ > "XENFEAT_hvm_callback_vector" > #else > #define FEATURES_PVH /* Not supported */ > #endif > ... > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES, .asciz "!writable_page_tables|pae_pgdir_above_4gb"FEATURES_PVH)As long as those new fields exists with the older hypervisors - that is OK. If you define new ones the old hypervisors (say Xen 4.1) will refuse booting the kernel.> ... > > I don''t think we need to define a XENFEAT_pvh (or whatever it might be > called) since don''t need it in the code so there''s no need to define/use > it here. If/when we need something like that we can add it, or > preferably some more specific thing for the use case which crops up. > >> XEN_ELFNOTE_PVH_FEATURES ? >> >> That way you can fill it with different ''features'' flags >> if need to. Say 1<<1 is basic, etc. > > I don''t think we need a PVH specific ELF note which just replicates the > XENFEAT infrastructure at this stage, if we do come to that then it > would be better to give PVH its own leaf in the existing feature space > (e.g. starting at 1*32+0). > > Ian. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel >
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 13:52 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:15 AM, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 21:39 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> > You Ok with XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, or should I call it > >> > XEN_ELFNOTE_PV_EXTENSIONS. Please LMK. > > > > My intention was that you add XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel et al. to > > the existing XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES note rather than adding a whole new > > note. I some how missed that this is what you were doing above. e.g. > > what I meant was: > > > > in Kconfig: > > config XEN_X86_PVH > > bool "Support for running as a PVH guest (EXPERIMENTAL)" > > depends X86_64 && <..etc..> && EXPERIMENTAL > > help > > This option enables support for running as a PVH > > guest (PV guest using hardware extensions) under > > a suitably capable hypervisor. > > > > This option is EXPERIMETNAL because the > > hypervisor interfaces which it uses are not yet > > considered stable therefore backwards and > > forwards compatibility is not yet guaranteed. > > > > If unsure, say N. > > > > Adjust the depends to suit reality. > > > > I thought we had that second paragraph for ARM too, but it seems like I > > was wrong, we should probably add it. > > > > then in xen-head.S (adjusted for features actually used by PVH): > > #ifdef CONFIG_XEN_X86_PVH > > #define FEATURES_PVH "XENFEAT_writable_descriptor_tables|" \ > > "XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap|" \ > > "XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel" \ > > "XENFEAT_hvm_callback_vector" > > #else > > #define FEATURES_PVH /* Not supported */ > > #endif > > ... > > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES, .asciz "!writable_page_tables|pae_pgdir_above_4gb"FEATURES_PVH) > > As long as those new fields exists with the older hypervisors - that > is OK. If you define new > ones the old hypervisors (say Xen 4.1) will refuse booting the kernel.The note declares features which can be supported by this kernel but they are not mandatory unless you prefix them with a "!" so assuming you don''t put a ! in an older hypervisor will boot the kernel just fine. It just won''t enable PVH, which is what we want. Ian.
On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 09:15:26 +0100 Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:> On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 21:39 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > You Ok with XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_PVH, or should I call it > > > XEN_ELFNOTE_PV_EXTENSIONS. Please LMK. > > > > XEN_ELFNOTE_PVH_FEATURES ? > > > > That way you can fill it with different ''features'' flags > > if need to. Say 1<<1 is basic, etc. > > I don''t think we need a PVH specific ELF note which just replicates > the XENFEAT infrastructure at this stage, if we do come to that then > it would be better to give PVH its own leaf in the existing feature > space (e.g. starting at 1*32+0). > > Ian.Got it, thanks for the nice detailed note. I''ll change it as above. Mukesh