[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] PVH backports to 4.9 and 4.8
On 01/11/2018 12:01 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:03:05AM +0000, George Dunlap wrote: >> On 01/11/2018 10:58 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 05:08:15PM +0000, George Dunlap wrote: >>>> Part of our solution to XSA-254 SP3 (aka "Meltdown") is to backport >>>> the PVH mode from 4.10 to 4.9 and 4.8. This will first allow people >>>> able to run PVH kernels to switch their PV guests directly to PVH >>>> guests; and second, eventually enable the backport of patches which >>>> will enable transparent changing of PV guests into PVH guests. >>>> >>>> All of the hypervisor support seems to have existed already in 4.8, so >>>> the only backports involve toolstack patches. >>> >>> Thanks for looking into this. >>> >>> My general opinion given those are toolstack only patches is that if >>> it works it's fine. >>> >>>> I've put up two trees for a first-cut backport of the PVH >>>> functionality, to 4.9 and 4.8 here: >>>> >>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/people/gdunlap/xen.git >>>> >>>> Branches out/pvh-backport/4.8/v1 and out/pvh-backport/4.9/v1 >>>> >>>> Below are the patches backported from 4.10 to 4.9 (23 patches total): >>>> >>>> Roger Pau Monne libxl: add is_default checkers for string and timer_mode >>>> types >>>> Roger Pau Monne libxl: introduce a way to mark fields as deprecated in >>>> the idl >>> >>> This or one of the related patches is going to add fields in >>> domain_build_info, which will break the ABI. Is this expected/OK? >> >> Oh right -- this needs to be ported to add the fields at the end. >> >> Going back to the 4.10 series, it looks like there are also some "shim >> host" patches having to do with enabling CPUID faulting in the guest. >> Do we need to backport those to 4.9 and 4.8 as well? ISTR they may rely >> on some hypervisor infrastructure which would then also need to be >> backported. > > IIRC those are for AMD hardware? > > Adding Andy who worked on those patches. From what I recall there were two parts: 1. Allow AMD to even enable CPUID faulting if available 2. Enable CPUID faulting for shim guests (both Intel and AMD) The point of #1 was to enable #2 on AMD hardware. -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |