Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V3] tools/libxc, xen/x86: Added xc_set_mem_access_multi()

[Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/06/2016 01:51 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06/09/16 11:45, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>> On 06/09/16 11:00, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
>>>> index b648a9d..e65a9b8 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
>>>> @@ -1836,6 +1836,15 @@ long p2m_set_mem_access(struct domain *d, gfn_t
>>>> gfn, uint32_t nr,
>>>>      return 0;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +long p2m_set_mem_access_multi(struct domain *d,
>>>> +                              const XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(const_uint64)
>>>> pfn_list,
>>>> +                              const XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(const_uint8)
>>>> access_list,
>>>> +                              uint32_t nr, uint32_t start, uint32_t
>>>> mask,
>>>> +                              unsigned int altp2m_idx)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    return -ENOTSUP;
>>>
>>> Why didn't you implement this function for ARM?
>>
>> Because unfortunately I don't have an ARM setup to test it on and I
>> thought it would be unfair to publish the patch with untestable ARM
>> support.
> 
> So what's the plan? Who will implement the ARM solution?

My assumption has been that whoever first needs this functionality and
is working on an ARM project would implement it. Touching the ARM code
only occured because it became necessary in order to compile.

The patch subject mentions that these are mainly x86 changes ("xen/x86").

> I don't think there is a technical challenge to implement the ARM one.

apply_p2m_changes(), which would require modification, doesn't look
trivial, and I would unfortunately not be able to test the changes
beyond making sure the code still compiles.


Thanks,
Razvan

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