On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 05:26:41PM +0800, Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
> So far, we just found the msi-x case. Maybe we will add msi-x support later,
> so this fix is also required.
Okay, makes sense.
> >>> And why GPFN_LOW_MMIO independently of addr? Shouldn't it be aware
> >>> of io_ranges[]?
> >>
> >> For the low mmio ranges (3G-3.5G), we can use the fixed mfn
> >> GPFN_LOW_MMIO combined with ASSIGN_io to indicate whether the p2m
> >> entries are mmio ranges. You may refer to io_ranges and it also
> >> use the fixed GPFN_LOW_MMIO to intialize p2m entries for low mmio
> >> range.
> >
> > Hmm, there are two cases to call
> > xc_domain_mempry_mapping(DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING). - Just to remove the
> > entry. zap_domain_page_one() is wanted.
>
> Why remove the entries ? For hvm domain, I think the entires should always
> exists during the lift of the guests.
> You may refer to the call vmx_build_io_physmap_table, and these entries are
> created at the initialization time of the domain.
>
> > the one in pt_iomem_map() and remove_msix_mapping() excpet called
> > by pt_iomem_map()
>
> >
> > - mmio on the area should be rounted to qemu-dm
> > GPFN_LOW_MMIO and ASSIGN_io are wanted.
> >
> > remove_msix_mapping() which is called by pt_iomem_map().
> >
> > Is there a way to distinguish them.
>
> We don't need to distinguish them, and instead of we should keep these
> entires in two cases consistent with the values which is initilized by
> vmx_build_io_physmap_table.
The current x86 implementation mmio which isn't handled by xen VMM
are passed to qemu-dm.
On the other hand, the current xen/ia64 check _PAGE_IO and
if _PAGE_IO it is passed to qemu-dm, otherwise panic_domain()
So the behaviour should be changed such that if load/store on
the unpresent p2m entry is passed to qemu-dm like x86.
--
yamahata
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
Home