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-ppc-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xencomm, xenmem and hypercall continuation

To: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xencomm, xenmem and hypercall continuation
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 08:03:51 +0000
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 00:04:16 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20061110054925.GE19699%yamahata@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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AccEnsIIAG2FJHCSEduarAANk04WTA==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xencomm, xenmem and hypercall continuation
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620
On 10/11/06 5:49 am, "Isaku Yamahata" <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> fix xenmem hypercall for non-trivial xencomm arch(i.e. ia64, and powerpc)
> On ia64 and powerpc, guest_handle_add_offset() effect persists over
> hypercall continuation because its consumed offset is recorced in
> guest domains memory space.
> On the other hand, x86 guest_handle_add_offset() effect is volatile
> over hypercall continuation.
> So xenmem hypercall(more specifically increase_reservation,
> decrease_reservaton, populate_memory and exchange) is broken on
> ia64 and powerpc.
> #ifdef/ifndef CONFIG_X86 is used to solve this issue without breaking
> the existing ABI. #ifdef is ugly, but it would be difficult to solve
> this issue without #ifdef and to preserve the existing ABI simaltaneously.

There must be a cleaner solution. We're not going to ifdef all over the
place.

Does xencomm have to persist the offset increments in guest memory (does the
guest depend on this)? Could it undo these effects across continuations so
that guest_handle_add_offset works properly?

 -- Keir



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