Re: [Xen-devel] HVM resumable with -c flag?

["Mike Sun" <msun@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmm...  I attempted to replace the tools/ioemu source in 3.1.4 with
that from 3.2.1... and find this call in cirrus_vga.c is not supported
in 3.1.x:

 (void)xc_domain_pin_memory_cacheattr(
        xc_handle, domid,
        begin >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS,
        end >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS,
        XEN_DOMCTL_MEM_CACHEATTR_WB);

I looked into patching 3.1.x with the code necessary to support that
function call, but found myself down a long list of dependencies that
required updating things like mtrr and mm.c which seemed a bit
dangerous.

I figured I'd just remove that memory cache pin call in cirrus_vga.c
and see how that went.  (The only other slight change I had to make
was to remove the z position stuff from xenfb.c).  Everything build,
but I can't create HVM domains without them getting wedged in a
"weird" state (i.e. -----), so it looks like qemu-dm is bugging out.

Any ideas on how I can port the 0.90 version of QEMU in Xen 3.2.x into
Xen 3.1.x easily?

Thanks,
Mike

On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> qemu-dm should be quite portable.
>
>  -- Keir
>
> On 16/9/08 20:30, "Mike Sun" <msun@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Keir.  It is the qemu-dm.  Hmm, not my dilemma is whether it'd
>> be a fairly easy thing to incorporate the newer qemu-dm into a 3.1.x
>> branch...  I've made some major changes to the shadow page table code
>> for my work and would rather not try and merge them into 3.2.x if I
>> don't have to at this point.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 3:09 AM, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> On 13/9/08 03:52, "John Levon" <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 04:42:22PM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/9/08 16:33, "Mike Sun" <msun@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry if this is a stupid question, but are you saying that all HVM
>>>>>> guests are now resumable and there no longer needs to be any check for
>>>>>> that as was done by Brendan Cully's earlier patch requests?
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct. All HVM PV drivers must support suspend cancellation (i.e.,
>>>>> resume). And without PV drivers, resume is as simple as just continuing
>>>>> execution of the guest from where it left off!
>>>>
>>>> Uh, when was this requirement introduced?
>>>
>>> Since guest resume was supported by hypervisor and tools. We've never
>>> supported resume of HVM guests with 'uncooperative' PV drivers installed.
>>>
>>>  -- Keir
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

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