[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v15 14/19] pvh: Use PV handlers for PIO
>>> On 12.11.13 at 17:54, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/12/2013 02:33 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 11.11.13 at 15:57, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> @@ -566,7 +581,10 @@ int hvm_domain_initialise(struct domain *d) >>> d->arch.hvm_domain.io_handler->num_slot = 0; >>> >>> if ( is_pvh_domain(d) ) >>> + { >>> + register_portio_handler(d, 0, 0xffffffff, handle_pvh_io); >> >> Nice idea, but I'm afraid it'll need a little more than this long term >> (i.e. I'm fine for this to go is as is, with the second paragraph below >> address in some way): hvm_io_intercept() first tries >> dpci_ioport_intercept(), and without device model I think that's not >> correct. If indeed it isn't, a simple solution might be to just disallow >> the registration of translated I/O port ranges for PVH guests. >> >> The other thing here is the use of 0xffffffff: The parameter is a >> size one, not an end of range. And considering that we're talking >> about I/O ports, 0x10000 would seem to be the right value (or, >> if taking the potential wrapping into account, 0x10003). > > Oh, right -- I was looking at a trace of the guest, but confusing the > values written with the address. Do you just want to change it to > 0x10000? (Or 0x10003?) Yes, I will (but not today anymore). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |