[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] x86/boot: Clarify comment
On Fri Oct 11, 2024 at 2:58 PM BST, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 2:38 PM Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > On 11/10/2024 2:28 pm, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 02:08:37PM +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 1:56 PM Alejandro Vallejo > > >> <alejandro.vallejo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 09:52:44AM +0100, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@xxxxxxxxx> > > >>>> --- > > >>>> xen/arch/x86/boot/reloc.c | 2 +- > > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >>>> > > >>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/boot/reloc.c b/xen/arch/x86/boot/reloc.c > > >>>> index e50e161b27..e725cfb6eb 100644 > > >>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/reloc.c > > >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/reloc.c > > >>>> @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ typedef struct memctx { > > >>>> /* > > >>>> * Simple bump allocator. > > >>>> * > > >>>> - * It starts from the base of the trampoline and allocates > > >>>> downwards. > > >>>> + * It starts on top of space reserved for the trampoline and > > >>>> allocates downwards. > > >>> nit: Not sure this is much clearer. The trampoline is not a stack (and > > >>> even if > > >>> it was, I personally find "top" and "bottom" quite ambiguous when it > > >>> grows > > >>> backwards), so calling top to its lowest address seems more confusing > > >>> than not. > > >>> > > >>> If anything clarification ought to go in the which direction it takes. > > >>> Leaving > > >>> "base" instead of "top" and replacing "downwards" by "backwards" to > > >>> make it > > >>> crystal clear that it's a pointer that starts where the trampoline > > >>> starts, but > > >>> moves in the opposite direction. > > >>> > > >> Base looks confusing to me, but surely that comment could be confusing. > > >> For the trampoline 64 KB are reserved. Last 4 KB are used as a normal > > >> stack (push/pop/call/whatever), first part gets a copy of the > > >> trampoline code/data (about 6 Kb) the rest (so 64 - 4 - ~6 = ~54 kb) > > >> is used for the copy of MBI information. That "rest" is what we are > > >> talking about here. > > > Last? From what I looked at it seems to be the first 12K. > > > > > > #define TRAMPOLINE_STACK_SPACE PAGE_SIZE > > > #define TRAMPOLINE_SPACE (KB(64) - TRAMPOLINE_STACK_SPACE) > > > > > > To put it another way, with left=lo-addr and right=hi-addr. The code > > > seems to > > > do this... > > > > > > |<--------------64K-------------->| > > > |<-----12K--->| | s/12K/4K/ My brain merged the 12bits in the wrong place. Too much bit twiddling. > > > +-------------+-----+-------------+ > > > | stack-space | mbi | trampoline | > > > +-------------+-----+-------------+ > > > ^ ^ > > > | | > > > | +-- copied Multiboot info + modules > > > +----- initial memctx.ptr > > > > > > ... with the stack growing backwards to avoid overflowing onto mbi. > > > > > > Or am I missing something? > > > > So I was hoping for some kind of diagram like this, to live in > > arch/x86/include/asm/trampoline.h with the other notes about the trampoline. > > > > But, is that diagram accurate? Looking at > > /* Switch to low-memory stack which lives at the end of > trampoline region. */ > mov sym_esi(trampoline_phys), %edi > lea TRAMPOLINE_SPACE+TRAMPOLINE_STACK_SPACE(%edi),%esp > lea trampoline_boot_cpu_entry-trampoline_start(%edi),%eax > pushl $BOOT_CS32 > push %eax > > /* Copy bootstrap trampoline to low memory, below 1MB. */ > lea sym_esi(trampoline_start), %esi > mov $((trampoline_end - trampoline_start) / 4),%ecx > rep movsl > > So, from low to high > - trampoline code/data (%edi at beginning of copy is trampoline_phys, > %esi is trampoline_start) > - space (used for MBI copy) > - stack (%esp is set to trampoline_phys + TRAMPOLINE_SPACE + > TRAMPOLINE_STACK_SPACE) > > Frediano So it's reversed from what I thought |<--------------64K-------------->| | |<-----4K---->| +-------------+-----+-------------+ | text-(ish) | mbi | stack-space | +-------------+-----+-------------+ ^ ^ | | | +-- initial memctx.ptr +------------------- copied Multiboot info + modules Your version of the comment is a definite improvement over the nonsense that was there before. Sorry for the noise :) Cheers, Alejandro
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |