On 14/11/2018 12:35, Mirela Simonovic wrote:
Hi Julien,
Hi,
On 11/14/2018 11:45 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 13/11/2018 20:39, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Julien Grall wrote:
However, what is the issue with saving all the registers here?
We need to save arguments that are provided by a guest with system
suspend PSCI call. These arguments are the entry point that needs to
be saved in program counter and context ID that needs to be saved in
x0/r0. We don't have these arguments here. Context switch happens
after processing the system suspend PSCI call, so it's too late.
It does not feel right to modify ctxt_switch{from,to} for suspend/resume. If
you want to reset the vCPU state before blocking the vCPU, then you should
instead
I think it's not clear what problem are we discussing here, at least it's not to
me. So I'll make an assumption, and please correct me if I'm wrong.
In the patches we submitted, the VCPU context is not reset in
ctxt_switch{from,to}. My understanding is that you suggested/asked to reset the
VCPU context when switch happens, and I explained why is that not possible - at
least not without additional code changes, that may not be so small. I agree
with Andrew's comment in this perspective - reset of VCPU should not (and right
now cannot) be done when the context is switched.
I didn't ask to reset the vCPU context in the switch. Instead we should make
sure the vCPU context is synced to memory before modifying it.
It seems that solution works on x86 using domain_pause (see
hvm_s3_{resume,suspend}). So I am not sure why it cannot be use on Arm. Note
that it may require more work.
You missed the end of the suggestion here
Whoops. I meant that instead you should save the context of the vCPU in
advance or reset the vCPU using the system registers directly.
But my preference is to reset the vCPU when you receive the wake-up interrupt.
Without you presenting more details how would that work I cannot really provide
any comment, nor say that your preference could work or be better compared to
what is in this series. Honestly, I don't understand what exactly you're
proposing, because more things needs to be think-through beyond the place to put
a code.
We submitted a code that works, which is very elegant and nice in my opinion
(fair to say we may not share opinions here), and does not require lots of code
changes. So there's the reference.
Could you please clarify why do you think the proposed solution is not good?
The context switch is about saving/restore the context from the hardware. We can
decide to optimize it in the suspend case (though it might be premature), but it
is clearly the wrong place to decide to resume a domain.
If saving the context happens to late, then we should look at making sure it
will happen earlier on (see my comment above).
And why do you think that what you're proposing is better? Lets be more clear
here - how exactly you propose to implement that?
The same way as hvm_s3_{suspend/resume} works on x86.
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
