RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]vbd/vnif paravirtulization driver hypervisorsupport]

["Ling, Xiaofeng" <xiaofeng.ling@xxxxxxxxx>]

Keir Fraser <mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 3 Jun 2005, at 03:40, Xiaofeng Ling wrote:
> 
>> It's now all use shadow_mode_external, and use a permit bitmap for
>> hypercall from vmx domain. Do you think it's now acceptable?
>> It's against 1657.
> 
> Still messy imo. When I said to split the path by
> shadow_mode_externel, I meant you should do it within the uaccess
> macros/functions; not in their callers.  
I've already done that for copy_from/to_user, 
but for __copy_from/to_user
I can not do that, because not all the caller shall call copy_from/to_guest

> But I'm not sure that is the best way either. Since VMX uses so few
> hypercalls, and you can easily define a new hypercall jump table in
> C, why not jump at alternative wrappers for those hypercalls that do
> the correct copy to/from guest, and then share the common guts of the
> hypercall with the paravirtualised version? I guess it depends how
> embedded in the core of each hypercall the VMX changes are...     
for  copy_from/to_user, I've already changed in the callee.
For __copy_from/to_user, they are embedded deep.




>   -- Keir

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel