Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 04/12] xen/x86: split Dom0 build into PV and PVHv2

2016-08-04 Thread Andrew Cooper 
On 01/08/16 12:36, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 06:57:08PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 29/07/16 17:28, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> Split the Dom0 builder into two different functions, one for PV (and classic
>>> PVH), and another one for PVHv2. Introduce a new command line parameter,
>>> dom0hvm in order to request the creation of a PVHv2 Dom0.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné 
>>> ---
>>> Cc: Jan Beulich 
>>> Cc: Andrew Cooper 
>>> ---
>>>  xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c | 27 ++-
>>>  xen/arch/x86/setup.c|  9 +
>> A patch to docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown please.
> OK, I wasn't really sure if we want to introduce a new command line option, 
> or just use dom0pvh. In any case I will add it, we can always alias dom0pvh 
> to dom0pvh (or the other way around) when classic PVH support is 
> removed.

I am not terribly fussed, so long as the docs match the hypervisor
behaviour :)

>  
>>>  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
>>> index 09d79be..c0ef40f 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
>>> @@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ static int __init setup_permissions(struct domain *d)
>>>  return rc;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> -int __init construct_dom0(
>>> +static int __init construct_dom0_pv(
>>>  struct domain *d,
>>>  const module_t *image, unsigned long image_headroom,
>>>  module_t *initrd,
>>> @@ -1647,6 +1647,31 @@ out:
>>>  return rc;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static int __init construct_dom0_hvm(struct domain *d, const module_t 
>>> *image,
>>> + unsigned long image_headroom,
>>> + module_t *initrd,
>>> + void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t 
>>> *),
>>> + char *cmdline)
>>> +{
>>> +
>>> +printk("** Building a PVH Dom0 **\n");
>> Some naming curiosities here, especially given the parameter name.
> Hm, AFAIK we agreed on keeping the 'PVH' naming, but since internally Xen 
> has no concept of 'PVH' I think the constructor is better named as HVM (and 
> in fact if PVH wasn't there before I would just consider this a HVM Dom0).
>
> If people prefer HVM I can certainly change it, but I think it's going to 
> get messy.

Fair enough.

~Andrew

___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 04/12] xen/x86: split Dom0 build into PV and PVHv2

2016-08-01 Thread Roger Pau Monne 
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 06:57:08PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 29/07/16 17:28, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > Split the Dom0 builder into two different functions, one for PV (and classic
> > PVH), and another one for PVHv2. Introduce a new command line parameter,
> > dom0hvm in order to request the creation of a PVHv2 Dom0.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné 
> > ---
> > Cc: Jan Beulich 
> > Cc: Andrew Cooper 
> > ---
> >  xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c | 27 ++-
> >  xen/arch/x86/setup.c|  9 +
> 
> A patch to docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown please.

OK, I wasn't really sure if we want to introduce a new command line option, 
or just use dom0pvh. In any case I will add it, we can always alias dom0pvh 
to dom0pvh (or the other way around) when classic PVH support is 
removed.
 
> >  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> > index 09d79be..c0ef40f 100644
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> > @@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ static int __init setup_permissions(struct domain *d)
> >  return rc;
> >  }
> >  
> > -int __init construct_dom0(
> > +static int __init construct_dom0_pv(
> >  struct domain *d,
> >  const module_t *image, unsigned long image_headroom,
> >  module_t *initrd,
> > @@ -1647,6 +1647,31 @@ out:
> >  return rc;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int __init construct_dom0_hvm(struct domain *d, const module_t 
> > *image,
> > + unsigned long image_headroom,
> > + module_t *initrd,
> > + void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t 
> > *),
> > + char *cmdline)
> > +{
> > +
> > +printk("** Building a PVH Dom0 **\n");
> 
> Some naming curiosities here, especially given the parameter name.

Hm, AFAIK we agreed on keeping the 'PVH' naming, but since internally Xen 
has no concept of 'PVH' I think the constructor is better named as HVM (and 
in fact if PVH wasn't there before I would just consider this a HVM Dom0).

If people prefer HVM I can certainly change it, but I think it's going to 
get messy.

> > +
> > +return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int __init construct_dom0(struct domain *d, const module_t *image,
> > +  unsigned long image_headroom, module_t *initrd,
> > +  void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t *),
> > +  char *cmdline)
> > +{
> > +
> > +return is_hvm_domain(d) ?
> > +construct_dom0_hvm(d, image, image_headroom, initrd,
> > +   bootstrap_map, cmdline) :
> > +construct_dom0_pv(d, image, image_headroom, initrd, 
> > bootstrap_map,
> > +  cmdline);
> 
> This could be slightly less awkwardly split as:
> 
> (is_hvm_domain(d) ? construct_dom0_hvm : construct_dom0_pv)
> (d, image, image_headroom, initrd, bootstrap_map, cmdline);
> 
> with some appropriate indentation/alignment.

Done, thanks!

Roger.

___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 04/12] xen/x86: split Dom0 build into PV and PVHv2

2016-07-29 Thread Andrew Cooper 
On 29/07/16 17:28, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> Split the Dom0 builder into two different functions, one for PV (and classic
> PVH), and another one for PVHv2. Introduce a new command line parameter,
> dom0hvm in order to request the creation of a PVHv2 Dom0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné 
> ---
> Cc: Jan Beulich 
> Cc: Andrew Cooper 
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c | 27 ++-
>  xen/arch/x86/setup.c|  9 +

A patch to docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown please.

>  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> index 09d79be..c0ef40f 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> @@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ static int __init setup_permissions(struct domain *d)
>  return rc;
>  }
>  
> -int __init construct_dom0(
> +static int __init construct_dom0_pv(
>  struct domain *d,
>  const module_t *image, unsigned long image_headroom,
>  module_t *initrd,
> @@ -1647,6 +1647,31 @@ out:
>  return rc;
>  }
>  
> +static int __init construct_dom0_hvm(struct domain *d, const module_t *image,
> + unsigned long image_headroom,
> + module_t *initrd,
> + void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t 
> *),
> + char *cmdline)
> +{
> +
> +printk("** Building a PVH Dom0 **\n");

Some naming curiosities here, especially given the parameter name.

> +
> +return 0;
> +}
> +
> +int __init construct_dom0(struct domain *d, const module_t *image,
> +  unsigned long image_headroom, module_t *initrd,
> +  void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t *),
> +  char *cmdline)
> +{
> +
> +return is_hvm_domain(d) ?
> +construct_dom0_hvm(d, image, image_headroom, initrd,
> +   bootstrap_map, cmdline) :
> +construct_dom0_pv(d, image, image_headroom, initrd, 
> bootstrap_map,
> +  cmdline);

This could be slightly less awkwardly split as:

(is_hvm_domain(d) ? construct_dom0_hvm : construct_dom0_pv)
(d, image, image_headroom, initrd, bootstrap_map, cmdline);

with some appropriate indentation/alignment.

~Andrew


___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 04/12] xen/x86: split Dom0 build into PV and PVHv2

2016-07-29 Thread Roger Pau Monne 
Split the Dom0 builder into two different functions, one for PV (and classic
PVH), and another one for PVHv2. Introduce a new command line parameter,
dom0hvm in order to request the creation of a PVHv2 Dom0.

Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné 
---
Cc: Jan Beulich 
Cc: Andrew Cooper 
---
 xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c | 27 ++-
 xen/arch/x86/setup.c|  9 +
 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
index 09d79be..c0ef40f 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
@@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ static int __init setup_permissions(struct domain *d)
 return rc;
 }
 
-int __init construct_dom0(
+static int __init construct_dom0_pv(
 struct domain *d,
 const module_t *image, unsigned long image_headroom,
 module_t *initrd,
@@ -1647,6 +1647,31 @@ out:
 return rc;
 }
 
+static int __init construct_dom0_hvm(struct domain *d, const module_t *image,
+ unsigned long image_headroom,
+ module_t *initrd,
+ void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t *),
+ char *cmdline)
+{
+
+printk("** Building a PVH Dom0 **\n");
+
+return 0;
+}
+
+int __init construct_dom0(struct domain *d, const module_t *image,
+  unsigned long image_headroom, module_t *initrd,
+  void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t *),
+  char *cmdline)
+{
+
+return is_hvm_domain(d) ?
+construct_dom0_hvm(d, image, image_headroom, initrd,
+   bootstrap_map, cmdline) :
+construct_dom0_pv(d, image, image_headroom, initrd, bootstrap_map,
+  cmdline);
+}
+
 /*
  * Local variables:
  * mode: C
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
index 217c775..8d9c3a0 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
@@ -75,6 +75,10 @@ unsigned long __read_mostly cr4_pv32_mask;
 static bool_t __initdata opt_dom0pvh;
 boolean_param("dom0pvh", opt_dom0pvh);
 
+/* Boot dom0 in HVM mode */
+static bool_t __initdata opt_dom0hvm;
+boolean_param("dom0hvm", opt_dom0hvm);
+
 /*  Linux config option: propagated to domain0. */
 /* "acpi=off":Sisables both ACPI table parsing and interpreter. */
 /* "acpi=force":  Override the disable blacklist.   */
@@ -1492,6 +1496,11 @@ void __init noreturn __start_xen(unsigned long mbi_p)
 if ( opt_dom0pvh )
 domcr_flags |= DOMCRF_pvh | DOMCRF_hap;
 
+if ( opt_dom0hvm ) {
+domcr_flags |= DOMCRF_hvm | (hvm_funcs.hap_supported ? DOMCRF_hap : 0);
+config.emulation_flags = XEN_X86_EMU_LAPIC|XEN_X86_EMU_IOAPIC;
+}
+
 /*
  * Create initial domain 0.
  * x86 doesn't support arch-configuration. So it's fine to pass
-- 
2.7.4 (Apple Git-66)


___
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel