[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 0/7] KVM: x86: Allow Qemu/KVM to use PVH entry point
- To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 23:14:34 +0100
- Autocrypt: addr=pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= xsEhBFRCcBIBDqDGsz4K0zZun3jh+U6Z9wNGLKQ0kSFyjN38gMqU1SfP+TUNQepFHb/Gc0E2 CxXPkIBTvYY+ZPkoTh5xF9oS1jqI8iRLzouzF8yXs3QjQIZ2SfuCxSVwlV65jotcjD2FTN04 hVopm9llFijNZpVIOGUTqzM4U55sdsCcZUluWM6x4HSOdw5F5Utxfp1wOjD/v92Lrax0hjiX DResHSt48q+8FrZzY+AUbkUS+Jm34qjswdrgsC5uxeVcLkBgWLmov2kMaMROT0YmFY6A3m1S P/kXmHDXxhe23gKb3dgwxUTpENDBGcfEzrzilWueOeUWiOcWuFOed/C3SyijBx3Av/lbCsHU Vx6pMycNTdzU1BuAroB+Y3mNEuW56Yd44jlInzG2UOwt9XjjdKkJZ1g0P9dwptwLEgTEd3Fo UdhAQyRXGYO8oROiuh+RZ1lXp6AQ4ZjoyH8WLfTLf5g1EKCTc4C1sy1vQSdzIRu3rBIjAvnC tGZADei1IExLqB3uzXKzZ1BZ+Z8hnt2og9hb7H0y8diYfEk2w3R7wEr+Ehk5NQsT2MPI2QBd wEv1/Aj1DgUHZAHzG1QN9S8wNWQ6K9DqHZTBnI1hUlkp22zCSHK/6FwUCuYp1zcAEQEAAc0f UGFvbG8gQm9uemluaSA8Ym9uemluaUBnbnUub3JnPsLBTQQTAQIAIwUCVEJ7AwIbAwcLCQgH AwIBBhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEH4VEAzNNmmxNcwOniaZVLsuy1lW/ntYCA0Caz0i sHpmecK8aWlvL9wpQCk4GlOX9L1emyYXZPmzIYB0IRqmSzAlZxi+A2qm9XOxs5gJ2xqMEXX5 FMtUH3kpkWWJeLqe7z0EoQdUI4EG988uv/tdZyqjUn2XJE+K01x7r3MkUSFz/HZKZiCvYuze VlS0NTYdUt5jBXualvAwNKfxEkrxeHjxgdFHjYWhjflahY7TNRmuqPM/Lx7wAuyoDjlYNE40 Z+Kun4/KjMbjgpcF4Nf3PJQR8qXI6p3so2qsSn91tY7DFSJO6v2HwFJkC2jU95wxfNmTEUZc znXahYbVOwCDJRuPrE5GKFd/XJU9u5hNtr/uYipHij01WXal2cce1S5mn1/HuM1yo1u8xdHy IupCd57EWI948e8BlhpujUCU2tzOb2iYS0kpmJ9/oLVZrOcSZCcCl2P0AaCAsj59z2kwQS9D du0WxUs8waso0Qq6tDEHo8yLCOJDzSz4oojTtWe4zsulVnWV+wu70AioemAT8S6JOtlu60C5 dHgQUD1Tp+ReXpDKXmjbASJx4otvW0qah3o6JaqO79tbDqIvncu3tewwp6c85uZd48JnIOh3 utBAu684nJakbbvZUGikJfxd887ATQRUQnHuAQgAx4dxXO6/Zun0eVYOnr5GRl76+2UrAAem Vv9Yfn2PbDIbxXqLff7oyVJIkw4WdhQIIvvtu5zH24iYjmdfbg8iWpP7NqxUQRUZJEWbx2CR wkMHtOmzQiQ2tSLjKh/cHeyFH68xjeLcinR7jXMrHQK+UCEw6jqi1oeZzGvfmxarUmS0uRuf fAb589AJW50kkQK9VD/9QC2FJISSUDnRC0PawGSZDXhmvITJMdD4TjYrePYhSY4uuIV02v02 8TVAaYbIhxvDY0hUQE4r8ZbGRLn52bEzaIPgl1p/adKfeOUeMReg/CkyzQpmyB1TSk8lDMxQ zCYHXAzwnGi8WU9iuE1P0wARAQABwsEzBBgBAgAJBQJUQnHuAhsMAAoJEH4VEAzNNmmxp1EO oJy0uZggJm7gZKeJ7iUpeX4eqUtqelUw6gU2daz2hE/jsxsTbC/w5piHmk1H1VWDKEM4bQBT uiJ0bfo55SWsUNN+c9hhIX+Y8LEe22izK3w7mRpvGcg+/ZRG4DEMHLP6JVsv5GMpoYwYOmHn plOzCXHvmdlW0i6SrMsBDl9rw4AtIa6bRwWLim1lQ6EM3PWifPrWSUPrPcw4OLSwFk0CPqC4 HYv/7ZnASVkR5EERFF3+6iaaVi5OgBd81F1TCvCX2BEyIDRZLJNvX3TOd5FEN+lIrl26xecz 876SvcOb5SL5SKg9/rCBufdPSjojkGFWGziHiFaYhbuI2E+NfWLJtd+ZvWAAV+O0d8vFFSvr iy9enJ8kxJwhC0ECbSKFY+W1eTIhMD3aeAKY90drozWEyHhENf4l/V+Ja5vOnW+gCDQkGt2Y 1lJAPPSIqZKvHzGShdh8DduC0U3xYkfbGAUvbxeepjgzp0uEnBXfPTy09JGpgWbg0w91GyfT /ujKaGd4vxG2Ei+MMNDmS1SMx7wu0evvQ5kT9NPzyq8R2GIhVSiAd2jioGuTjX6AZCFv3ToO 53DliFMkVTecLptsXaesuUHgL9dKIfvpm+rNXRn9wAwGjk0X/A==
- Cc: kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rkrcmar@xxxxxxxxxx, dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bp@xxxxxxx, thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx, luto@xxxxxxxxxx, jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx, jgross@xxxxxxxx, Maran Wilson <maran.wilson@xxxxxxxxxx>, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 22:14:50 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
On 06/12/18 22:58, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 12/6/18 4:37 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 10:21:12PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Thanks! I should be able to post a Tested-by next Monday. Boris, are
>>> you going to pick it up for 4.21?
>> Boris me or Boris O.?
>>
>> :-)
>>
>
> O. ;-)
>
> There are some minor changes in non-xen x86 code so it would be good to
> get x86 maintainers' ack.
It's not really code, only Kconfig (and I remarked on it just now), but
it doesn't hurt of course.
> And as far as qemu/qboot changes, should we assume that the general
> approach is acceptable? I understand that the patches will probably need
> to go through some iterations but I want to make sure we have a path
> forward there.
Yes, the general approach is fine. I have already reviewed the qboot
parts, I guess we will also want an option ROM similar to
linuxboot/multiboot for SeaBIOS support but that's simple matter of
programming. :)
Paolo
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
