[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 9/16]: PVH xen: create PVH vmcs and initialization
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:56:39 +0000 "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On 12.01.13 at 02:59, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> wrote: > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c Fri Jan 11 16:31:33 2013 -0800 > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c Fri Jan 11 16:32:36 2013 -0800 > > @@ -331,6 +331,9 @@ void hvm_do_resume(struct vcpu *v) > > { > > ioreq_t *p; > > > > + if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) ) > > + return; > > Better avoid the call at the call site? Done. > > @@ -697,6 +697,246 @@ void vmx_vmcs_switch(struct vmcs_struct > > spin_unlock(&vmx->vmcs_lock); > > } > > > > +static noinline int pvh_construct_vmcs(struct vcpu *v) > > +{ > > This looks a lot like the "normal" HVM function - can't those be > folded reasonably, to reduce redundancy? > > > @@ -1156,6 +1404,9 @@ void vmx_do_resume(struct vcpu *v) > > hvm_asid_flush_vcpu(v); > > } > > > > + if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) ) > > + goto skip_inteLdbgr; /* PVH supports gdbsx and gdb > > inside PVH */ > > What do "inte", "L", and "dbgr" stand for here? Also, to me the > comment doesn't really explain anything. I understand the code is for some external intel debugger. I meant intel_dbgr. PVH, btw, is supported at the moment by gdbsx and gdb running inside the PVH guest. Anyways, got rid of the label: if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) reset_stack_and_jump(vmx_asm_do_vmentry); debug_state = v->domain->debugger_attached ...... thanks, Mukesh _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |