[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/5] hvm/mtrr: copy hardware state for Dom0
>>> On 15.05.18 at 11:16, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 02:48:16AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 15.05.18 at 10:35, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 01:52:43AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> >>> On 14.05.18 at 18:33, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 08:26:30AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 10.05.18 at 19:15, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> > Copy the state found on the hardware when creating a PVH Dom0. Since >> >> >> > the memory map provided to a PVH Dom0 is based on the native one >> >> >> > using >> >> >> > the same set of MTRR ranges should provide Dom0 with a sane MTRR >> >> >> > state >> >> >> > without having to manually build it in Xen. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> > --- >> >> >> > Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> >> >> >> > Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> > --- >> >> >> > xen/arch/x86/hvm/mtrr.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/mtrr.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/mtrr.c >> >> >> > index 95a3deabea..1cb000388a 100644 >> >> >> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/mtrr.c >> >> >> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/mtrr.c >> >> >> > @@ -176,6 +176,29 @@ int hvm_vcpu_cacheattr_init(struct vcpu *v) >> >> >> > ((uint64_t)PAT_TYPE_UC_MINUS << 48) | /* PAT6: UC- */ >> >> >> > ((uint64_t)PAT_TYPE_UNCACHABLE << 56); /* PAT7: UC */ >> >> >> > >> >> >> > + if ( is_hardware_domain(v->domain) ) >> >> >> > + { >> >> >> > + /* Copy values from the host. */ >> >> >> > + struct domain *d = v->domain; >> >> >> > + unsigned int i; >> >> >> > + >> >> >> > + if ( mtrr_state.have_fixed ) >> >> >> > + for ( i = 0; i < NUM_FIXED_MSR; i++ ) >> >> >> > + mtrr_fix_range_msr_set(d, m, i, >> >> >> > + ((uint64_t >> >> >> > *)mtrr_state.fixed_ranges)[i]); >> >> >> >> >> >> The presence/absence of fixed range MTRRs needs to be reflected in the >> >> >> capabilities MSR. Strictly speaking in their absence MSR access >> >> >> attempts to >> >> >> the fixed range MSRs should also cause #GP, as should any attempt to >> >> >> enable them in defType. >> >> > >> >> > My intention was to always provide the fixed range MTRR capability, >> >> > regardless of whether the underlying hardware has it or not. Then of >> >> > course fixed ranges won't be enabled by default in the deftype MSR if >> >> > the underlying hardware also hasn't got them enabled. >> >> >> >> What would the result be of the OS writing to any of these MSRs, or >> >> setting the respective enable bit? >> > >> > Likely the cache attributes for the guest will change if it sets some >> > fixed ranges and enables the FE bit. But I'm not sure why is that a >> > problem. >> >> "The guest" being Dom0 here, don't forget. I simply don't see how you >> would properly mimic the behavior without there actually being fixed >> range MTRRs. Plus it contradicts the patch description. > > Please bear with me. > > The reason of this patchset is to provide PVH Dom0 with a sane initial > MTRR state, not to allow a PVH Dom0 to set the host MTRR state > directly. > > So the fact that the underlying hardware doesn't have support for > fixed MTRR ranges shouldn't affect Xen's capability to provide such > feature to Dom0. > > I see no reason to allow Dom0 to directly control the host MTRR > values. A PVH Dom0 has it's own physical memory map and can set > whatever cache attributes it wishes without affecting the host MTRR > types. Oh, right, I've been confused by the mix of copying of host state and and leaving untouched of virtual capabilities. I'm sorry for the noise. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |