Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V3] tools/libxc, xen/x86: Added xc_set_mem_access_multi()

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/09/16 11:51, Julien Grall wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06/09/16 11:45, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>> On 06/09/16 11:00, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
>>>> index b648a9d..e65a9b8 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
>>>> @@ -1836,6 +1836,15 @@ long p2m_set_mem_access(struct domain *d, gfn_t
>>>> gfn, uint32_t nr,
>>>>      return 0;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +long p2m_set_mem_access_multi(struct domain *d,
>>>> +                              const XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(const_uint64)
>>>> pfn_list,
>>>> +                              const XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(const_uint8)
>>>> access_list,
>>>> +                              uint32_t nr, uint32_t start, uint32_t
>>>> mask,
>>>> +                              unsigned int altp2m_idx)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    return -ENOTSUP;
>>>
>>> Why didn't you implement this function for ARM?
>>
>> Because unfortunately I don't have an ARM setup to test it on and I
>> thought it would be unfair to publish the patch with untestable ARM
>> support.
> 
> So what's the plan? Who will implement the ARM solution?
> 
> I don't think there is a technical challenge to implement the ARM one.

Are we going to require that all new functionality be implemented both
on x86 and on ARM?  That seems like a bit of a lot to ask of someone
who's not going to use it (and as Razvan points out, can't even test
it).  The mem_access functionality is still fairly technical -- anyone
who decides they want to use it and runs across the same problem Razvan
did should have no trouble implementing this hypercall for ARM when they
need it.

 -George

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