Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 19/20] PVH xen: elf and iommu related changes to prep for dom0 PVH

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 17.05.13 at 03:14, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 09:03:16 +0100
> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> >>> On 16.05.13 at 03:58, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 15 May 2013 13:12:56 +0100
>> > "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > 
>> >> >>> On 15.05.13 at 02:52, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>> >> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>> >> > @@ -60,6 +60,10 @@ integer_param("maxcpus", max_cpus);
>> >> >  static bool_t __initdata disable_smep;
>> >> >  invbool_param("smep", disable_smep);
>> >> >  
>> >> > +/* Boot dom0 in PVH mode */
>> >> > +bool_t __initdata opt_dom0pvh;
>> >> > +boolean_param("dom0pvh", opt_dom0pvh);
>> >> 
>> >> Does this really belong here (instead of domain_build.c)?
>> > 
>> > Yes, so we can pass the flag to domain_create() which sets the
>> > guest type:
>> > 
>> >     domcr_flags = (opt_dom0pvh ? DOMCRF_pvh | DOMCRF_hap : 0);
>> >     domcr_flags |= DOMCRF_s3_integrity;
>> >     dom0 = domain_create(0, domcr_flags, 0);
>> 
>> The symbol is global, so use sites don't matter. And I continue to
>> think that logically it belongs into domain_build.c.
> 
> Oh, you mean just the declarations, sure I can do that.

Just to avoid confusion - I mean the _definition_ (of both variable
and command line argument), which header the declaration is in I
don't really care as long as it's half way sensible.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel