[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 13/23] xen/arm: implement construct_domU
On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > On 10/19/18 11:53 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Julien Grall wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 05/10/2018 19:47, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Similar to construct_dom0, construct_domU creates a barebone DomU guest. > > > > > > > > The device tree node passed as argument is compatible "xen,domain", see > > > > docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt. > > > > > > > > Add const to kernel_probe dt_device_node parameter. > > > > > > This likely belongs to patch #7 where the parameter was added. > > > > OK > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > Changes in v4: > > > > - constify kernel_probe > > > > - change title > > > > - better error messages and printed info > > > > - 64bit memory > > > > > > > > Changes in v3: > > > > - move setting type before allocate_memory > > > > - add ifdef around it and a comment > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > - rename mem to memory > > > > - make cpus and memory mandatory > > > > - remove wront comment from commit message > > > > - cpus and memory are read as integers > > > > - read the vpl011 option > > > > --- > > > > xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c | 37 > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > > > xen/arch/arm/kernel.c | 3 ++- > > > > xen/arch/arm/kernel.h | 2 +- > > > > 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c > > > > index 547b624..efb530a 100644 > > > > --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c > > > > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c > > > > @@ -369,7 +369,6 @@ static void __init allocate_memory_11(struct domain > > > > *d, > > > > } > > > > } > > > > -#if 0 > > > > > > Please add a word about this change in the commit message. > > > > OK > > > > > > > > static bool __init allocate_bank_memory(struct domain *d, > > > > struct kernel_info *kinfo, > > > > gfn_t sgfn, > > > > @@ -450,7 +449,6 @@ fail: > > > > (unsigned long)kinfo->unassigned_mem >> 10); > > > > BUG(); > > > > } > > > > -#endif > > > > static int __init write_properties(struct domain *d, struct > > > > kernel_info > > > > *kinfo, > > > > const struct dt_device_node *node) > > > > @@ -2294,7 +2292,40 @@ static int __init __construct_domain(struct > > > > domain > > > > *d, struct kernel_info *kinfo > > > > static int __init construct_domU(struct domain *d, > > > > const struct dt_device_node *node) > > > > { > > > > - return -ENOSYS; > > > > + struct kernel_info kinfo = {}; > > > > + int rc; > > > > + u64 mem; > > > > + > > > > + rc = dt_property_read_u64(node, "memory", &mem); > > > > + if ( !rc ) > > > > + { > > > > + printk("Error building DomU: cannot read \"memory\" > > > > property\n"); > > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > + } > > > > + kinfo.unassigned_mem = (paddr_t)mem << 10; > > > > > > I noticed I forgot to answer to: > > > "KB() only works for numbers, it is defined as: (_AC(_kb, ULL) << 10)" > > > > > > unsigned long long is always going to be bigger than paddr_t. Also, we > > > already > > > use MB(...) in similar situation. So I am not sure to understand your > > > concern > > > here. > > > > I admit that my explanation was so bad that even I had to go back to > > figure out what I meant :-) > > > > What I wanted to say is that KB() only works for constants, not > > variables. So KB(10) works, but KB(mem) does not. > > Oh, that's annoying. Can you use mem * SZ_1K then? OK _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |