On 2017年08月22日 21:48, Wei Liu wrote: >> > Hi, Wei >> > Thanks for your comments. >> > >> > iirc, HVM only supports one module; DMAR cannot be a new module. Joining to >> > the existing one is the approach we are taking. >> > >> > Which kind of conflicts you think should be resolved? If you mean I >> > forget to free the old buf, I will fix this. If you mean the potential >> > overlap between the binary passed by admin and DMAR table built here, I >> > don't have much idea on this. Even without the DMAR table, the binary >> > may contains MADT or other tables and tool stacks don't intrepret the >> > binary and check whether there are conflicts, right? >> > > Thinking a bit more about this, when I first said "conflicts" I didn't > mean to parse the content. I was referring to the code in > libxl_x86_apci.c which also seems to manipulate acpi_modules.
Code in libxl_x86_acpi.c works for Hvmlite/PVHv2. The code we added is for hvm guest. > > I would like the code to generate dmar take into consideration > libxl__dom_load_acpi. > If add dmar table for hvmlite, we should combine dmar table with other ACPI table and populate into acpi_modules[2]. This is how hvmlite add other ACPI tables in libxl__dom_load_acpi(). -- Best regards Tianyu Lan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
