On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: > On 05/10/2010 10:28 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: >> >> On 05/10/2010 06:22 PM, Cam Macdonell wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> + >>>>> + /* if the position is -1, then it's shared memory region fd */ >>>>> + if (incoming_posn == -1) { >>>>> + >>>>> + s->num_eventfds = 0; >>>>> + >>>>> + if (check_shm_size(s, incoming_fd) == -1) { >>>>> + exit(-1); >>>>> + } >>>>> + >>>>> + /* creating a BAR in qemu_chr callback may be crazy */ >>>>> + create_shared_memory_BAR(s, incoming_fd); >>>>> >>>> It probably is... why can't you create it during initialization? >>> >>> This is for the shared memory server implementation, so the fd for the >>> shared memory has to be received (over the qemu char device) from the >>> server before the BAR can be created via qemu_ram_mmap() which adds >>> the necessary memory >>> >> >> >> We could do the handshake during initialization. I'm worried that the >> device will appear without the BAR, and strange things will happen. But the >> chardev API is probably not geared for passing data during init. >> >> Anthony, any ideas? > > Why can't we create the BAR with just normal RAM and then change it to a > mmap()'d fd after initialization? This will be behavior would be important > for live migration as it would let you quickly migrate preserving the memory > contents without waiting for an external program to reconnect. > > Regards, > > Anthony Lioguori > >>> Otherwise, if the BAR is allocated during initialization, I would have >>> to use MAP_FIXED to mmap the memory. This is what I did before the >>> qemu_ram_mmap() function was added. >> >> What would happen to any data written to the BAR before the the handshake >> completed? I think it would disappear. > > You don't have to do MAP_FIXED. You can allocate a ram area and map that in > when disconnected. When you connect, you create another ram area and > memcpy() the previous ram area to the new one. You then map the second ram > area in.
the memcpy() would overwrite the contents of the shared memory each time a guest joins which would be dangerous. > > From the guest's perspective, it's totally transparent. For the backend, > I'd suggest having an explicit "initialized" ack or something so that it > knows that the data is now mapped to the guest. Yes, I think the ack is the way to go, so the guest has to be aware of it. Would setting a flag in the driver-specific config space be an acceptable ack that the shared region is now mapped? Cam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html