Re: [Xen-devel] [V10 PATCH 14/23] PVH xen: additional changes to support PVH guest creation and execution.

[George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> @@ -443,6 +445,9 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) 
> u_domctl)
>          domcr_flags = 0;
>          if ( op->u.createdomain.flags & XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm_guest )
>              domcr_flags |= DOMCRF_hvm;
> +        else if ( op->u.createdomain.flags & XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hap )
> +            domcr_flags |= DOMCRF_pvh;     /* PV with HAP is a PVH guest */

Um, wait a minute -- I don't think we want to exclude the possibility
of *ever* having PVH with shadow pagetables, do we?  Wouldn't it make
more sense to just add XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_pvh_guest?

> +
>          if ( op->u.createdomain.flags & XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hap )
>              domcr_flags |= DOMCRF_hap;
>          if ( op->u.createdomain.flags & XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_s3_integrity )
> diff --git a/xen/common/kernel.c b/xen/common/kernel.c
> index 72fb905..3bba758 100644
> --- a/xen/common/kernel.c
> +++ b/xen/common/kernel.c
> @@ -289,7 +289,11 @@ DO(xen_version)(int cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) 
> arg)
>              if ( current->domain == dom0 )
>                  fi.submap |= 1U << XENFEAT_dom0;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_X86
> -            if ( !is_hvm_vcpu(current) )
> +            if ( is_pvh_vcpu(current) )
> +                fi.submap |= (1U << XENFEAT_hvm_safe_pvclock) |
> +                             (1U << XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel) |
> +                             (1U << XENFEAT_hvm_callback_vector);
> +            else if ( !is_hvm_vcpu(current) )

While you're at it, would it make sense to change this to
"is_pv_vcpu()", just to make it easier to read?

  -George

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