[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v3 1/6] xen/arm: Add basic save/restore support for ARM
On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 11:46 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 14/05/14 11:25, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-05-08 at 23:11 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >>> diff --git a/xen/include/public/arch-arm/hvm/save.h > >>> b/xen/include/public/arch-arm/hvm/save.h > >>> index 75b8e65..8312e7b 100644 > >>> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-arm/hvm/save.h > >>> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-arm/hvm/save.h > >>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > >>> * be saved along with the domain's memory and device-model state. > >>> * > >>> * Copyright (c) 2012 Citrix Systems Ltd. > >>> + * Copyright (c) 2014 Samsung Electronics. > >>> * > >>> * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining > >>> a copy > >>> * of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), > >>> to > >>> @@ -26,6 +27,24 @@ > >>> #ifndef __XEN_PUBLIC_HVM_SAVE_ARM_H__ > >>> #define __XEN_PUBLIC_HVM_SAVE_ARM_H__ > >>> > >>> +#define HVM_ARM_FILE_MAGIC 0x92385520 > >>> +#define HVM_ARM_FILE_VERSION 0x00000001 > >>> + > >>> +/* Note: For compilation purpose hvm_save_header name is the same as x86, > >>> + * but layout is different. */ > >>> +struct hvm_save_header > >>> +{ > >>> + uint32_t magic; /* Must be HVM_ARM_FILE_MAGIC */ > >>> + uint32_t version; /* File format version */ > >>> + uint32_t cpuinfo; /* Record MIDR_EL1 info of saving > >>> machine */ > >>> +}; > >>> +DECLARE_HVM_SAVE_TYPE(HEADER, 1, struct hvm_save_header); > >>> + > >>> +/* > >>> + * Largest type-code in use > >>> + */ > >>> +#define HVM_SAVE_CODE_MAX 1 > >>> + > >>> #endif > >>> > >>> /* > >> Hmm - it is quite poor to have this magically named "hvm_save_header". > > We frequently have arch interfaces where generic code requires arch code > > to provide particular structs or functions etc. What is poor about this > > particular instance of that pattern? > Save/restore is currently asymmetric in this regard. The save side > treats this x86 structure as common, whereas load is entirely arch specific. > > Fixing the asymmetry sensibly involves pushing the save side into arch code. OK, that's an actual reason, thanks. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |