WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][v2] Hybrid extension support in Xen

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][v2] Hybrid extension support in Xen
From: Sheng Yang <sheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 22:13:06 +0800
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:14:50 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C78DE0C7.8C0B%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Intel Opensource Technology Center
References: <C78DE0C7.8C0B%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31-17-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; )
On Tuesday 02 February 2010 22:01:43 Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 02/02/2010 13:52, "Sheng Yang" <sheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I didn't even find where these get used, except to reserve an area in
> >> e820, and it wasn't clear why that reservation is necessary.
> >
> > It has been used in the last [6/6] patch of Linux kernel side, which
> > would use the pages to map grant table. It works the same as the MMIO
> > region in PVonHVM device. Reserve it in BIOS because we think it's more
> > elegant than depends on QEmu to provide the reserved memory space.
> 
> Hmm. Can't this be done in phases? It seems unnecessary to be making
>  changes solely to remove qemu dependencies in the intial patchset, when
>  the patchset does not actually achieve that aim.
> 
> I think an HVM guest with no PCI space is a little way off, and perhaps we
> can find a better way than hardcoding an address in two places.

Sure. I would try stick to old QEmu provided MMIO first. (Maybe try Ian 
Campbell's advice to get some more flexible ones later).

-- 
regards
Yang, Sheng


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>