On 8/11/2016 4:58 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.08.16 at 10:47, wrote:
On 8/10/2016 6:43 PM, Yu Zhang wrote:
For " && p2mt != p2m_ioreq_server" condition, it is just to guarantee
that if a write
operation is trapped, and at the same period, device model changed the
status of
ioreq server, it
>>> On 11.08.16 at 10:47, wrote:
> On 8/10/2016 6:43 PM, Yu Zhang wrote:
>> For " && p2mt != p2m_ioreq_server" condition, it is just to guarantee
>> that if a write
>> operation is trapped, and at the same period, device model changed the
>> status of
>> ioreq server, it should be discarded.
>
On 8/10/2016 6:43 PM, Yu Zhang wrote:
On 8/10/2016 6:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.08.16 at 10:09, wrote:
On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
@@ -178,8 +179,34 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io(
break;
case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
{
-
On 8/10/2016 6:43 PM, Paul Durrant wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
Sent: 10 August 2016 11:33
To: Paul Durrant; Yu Zhang
Cc: Andrew Cooper; George Dunlap; Jun Nakajima; Kevin Tian;
zhiyuan...@intel.com; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Tim (Xen.org)
Subjec
On 8/10/2016 6:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.08.16 at 10:09, wrote:
On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
@@ -178,8 +179,34 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io(
break;
case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
{
-struct hvm_ioreq_server *s =
-
> -Original Message-
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
> Sent: 10 August 2016 11:33
> To: Paul Durrant; Yu Zhang
> Cc: Andrew Cooper; George Dunlap; Jun Nakajima; Kevin Tian;
> zhiyuan...@intel.com; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Tim (Xen.org)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] x86/ioreq
>>> On 10.08.16 at 10:09, wrote:
>
> On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
>>> @@ -178,8 +179,34 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io(
>>> break;
>>> case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
>>> {
>>> -struct hvm_ioreq_server *s =
>>> -hv
On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
@@ -178,8 +179,34 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io(
break;
case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
{
-struct hvm_ioreq_server *s =
-hvm_select_ioreq_server(curr->domain, &p);
+struct hvm_iore
> Sent: 09 August 2016 09:11
> >> To: Paul Durrant; Yu Zhang
> >> Cc: Andrew Cooper; George Dunlap; Jun Nakajima; Kevin Tian;
> >> zhiyuan...@intel.com; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Tim (Xen.org)
> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 3/4] x86/ioreq server: Add HVMO
)
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 3/4] x86/ioreq server: Add HVMOP to
map guest ram with p2m_ioreq_server to an ioreq server.
On 09.08.16 at 09:39, wrote:
On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
+rc = -ENOENT;
+list_for_each_entry ( s
en-devel] [PATCH v5 3/4] x86/ioreq server: Add HVMOP to
> map guest ram with p2m_ioreq_server to an ioreq server.
>
> >>> On 09.08.16 at 09:39, wrote:
> > On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>> On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wro
>>> On 09.08.16 at 09:39, wrote:
> On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
>>> +rc = -ENOENT;
>>> +list_for_each_entry ( s,
>>> + &d->arch.hvm_domain.ioreq_server.list,
>>> + list_entry )
>>> +{
>>>
On 8/8/2016 11:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
@@ -178,8 +179,34 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io(
break;
case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
{
-struct hvm_ioreq_server *s =
-hvm_select_ioreq_server(curr->domain, &p);
+struct hvm_iore
>>> On 12.07.16 at 11:02, wrote:
> @@ -178,8 +179,34 @@ static int hvmemul_do_io(
> break;
> case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
> {
> -struct hvm_ioreq_server *s =
> -hvm_select_ioreq_server(curr->domain, &p);
> +struct hvm_ioreq_server *s;
> +
> +if
A new HVMOP - HVMOP_map_mem_type_to_ioreq_server, is added to
let one ioreq server claim/disclaim its responsibility for the
handling of guest pages with p2m type p2m_ioreq_server. Users
of this HVMOP can specify which kind of operation is supposed
to be emulated in a parameter named flags. Current
15 matches
Mail list logo
