Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] ARM: Support for guest-request vm-events

[Corneliu ZUZU <czuzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/28/2016 2:45 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 14:36 +0200, CORNELIU ZUZU wrote:
> > On 1/28/2016 1:23 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 13:17 +0200, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
> > > > This patch implements ARM support for guest-request vm-events.
> > > > The code has been ported from x86 side w/ minor adjustments.
> > > I've not looked at the patch yet, but if it only involves minor
> > > adjustments
> > > from the x86 side can some amount of it not be refactored into common
> > > code?
> > >
> > > Ian.
> > At a first glance it seems to me that parts of monitor vm-events code
> > could be moved to common.
> > But it also seems that it would require a bit of effort and I'm not sure
> > yet if the end result
> > won't actually complicate implementation of monitor vm-events for other
> > architectures in the future.
> > Some of the monitor vm-events implemented are strictly architecture
> > specific,
> > e.g. VM_EVENT_REASON_MOV_TO_MSR will always be an x86-only vm-event, unless
> > it is somehow generalized (maybe somehow merged w/
> > VM_EVENT_REASON_WRITE_CTRLREG?).
> > But *most* of them indeed don't directly have this kind of specificity,
> > so it would make sense to make
> > most of the code common, if possible.
> That the sort of thing we would usually handle by having the common code
> call into a arch_foo() to decode any non-common options.
>
> > To me personally this seems like a good idea and I'd be willing to give
> > it a try, but as I said,
> > it might require some other changes of the code, including x86 changes.
> > I was about to release another patch after this one to implement
> > control-register writes
> > vm-events for ARM, but I anticipate that doing this move first will
> > actually benefit my effort in that
> > direction as well (I think the patch code will get to be cleaner).
> >
> > So, shall I try it?
> >From my POV as an ARM maintainer I think this is the way to go. I've also
> copied the VM EVENT maintainers in case they object for some reason.
>
> I'd recommend always CCing Razvan and Tamas on this series, and considering
> adding any new ARM files to the entry in MAINTAINERS (assuming they don't
> object of course)
>
> Ian.
Ok, great. I'll try it tonight and post a patch series ASAP.
Concerning the CC list, Razvan actually noticed me earlier that he and 
Tamas should have
been on it for this patch, since it is vm-events related. He said the 
problem is w/ the
MAINTAINERS file and he will update it.

Corneliu.

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