Re: [Xen-devel] [V2 PATCH 1/8] PVH dom0: iommu related changes

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 25.11.13 at 02:19, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>- For now, iommu is required for PVH dom0. Check for that.
>>- For pvh, we need to do mfn_to_gmfn before calling mapping function
>>  intel_iommu_map_page/amd_iommu_map_page which expects a gfn.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>---
>> xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c |   17 +++++++++++++++--
>> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>>diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c
>>b/xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c
>>index 93ad122..dbbd034 100644
>>--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c
>>+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/iommu.c
>>@@ -125,15 +125,27 @@ int iommu_domain_init(struct domain *d)
>>     return hd->platform_ops->init(d);
>> }
>>
>>+static __init void check_dom0_pvh_reqs(struct domain *d)
>>+{
>>+    if ( !iommu_enabled )
>>+        panic("Presently, iommu must be enabled for pvh dom0\n");
>>+
>>+    if ( iommu_passthrough )
>>+        panic("For pvh dom0, dom0-passthrough must not be enabled\n");
>>+}
> 
> That is not very "check' type. You panic!
> 
> Could you instead just disable PVH dom0 booting and boot it as a normal PV 
> guest (or try)?

Aiui it's too late in the game already (i.e. would require starting
over, which surely gets too complicated for initial support).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel