[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: hypercalls with 64-bit results
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 16:03:19 +0100
- Authentication-results: esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Ian Jackson" <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 15:03:28 +0000
- Ironport-hdrordr: A9a23:kTy/FawXkq8qkKHHjbnZKrPxaegkLtp133Aq2lEZdPULSL39qy n+poV/6farskdyZJh5o6HyBEGBKUmsjqKdkrNhT4tKPTOW/VdASbsJ0WKM+UyeJ8STzJ8l6U 4kSdkPNDT8NzQbsS+Y2nj9Lz9D+qj4zEnAv463pBoDI2AaCNAGnmFE40SgYzxLrWJ9dOAE/e +nl7Z6Tk2bCAkqh6qAdwE4tzSqnayUqLvWJTo9QzI34giHij2lrJTgFQKD4xsYWzRThZ8/7G nsiWXCl+KemsD+7iWZ+37Y7pxQltek4MBEHtawhs8cLSipohq0Zb5mR6aJsFkO0aeSARcR4Y DxSiUbTp9OAkDqDzuISNzWqlTdOQMVmiffIJmj8CfeSILCNW0H4oF69Pdkm1Pimj4dleA56b lM2W2BsZpREFfvoATRjuK4By1Cpw6MunwlnvcUj3tDFa0kSJEUg7A+0SpuYcY99AST0vF0LA CrNrCO2B8eSyLsU1nJ+mZo29CiRXI1A1OPRVUDoNWc13xMkGl+1FZw/r1eop4szuNyd3B/3Z WEDk2orsACcuYGKaZmQOsRS8q+DWLABRrKLWKJOFziUKUKIWjEpZL76Kg8oLjCQu1L8LIi3J DaFF9Iv287fEzjTcWIwZ1Q6xjIBGGwRy7kxM1S74Vw/rf8WL3oOyueT01GqbrinxzeOLyVZx +XAuMdPxbOFxqnJW955XyzZ3AJEwhWbCQ8gKdxZ7uhmLO8FrHX
- Ironport-sdr: sSBG+VmRBs5zbMiKXFjkTuwkIocCrZVQ0PS/Aoh33mEhMH+s2vt1ArXuo5sFDXKCH3ujKRGO14 jaTioFHwJoHOj3rvbwD2QoeDo+YeMOwlKCt7UXrklkWYxFQYEOZ8xDJ4p1VHGOtpuG4QC+DTNn iTh1Mk7Nwgs/mlEInSkOdN8TsDWCpH0tcaQt7lJ2Aln7BICF8ZdhHKaCfXQM1jzIqGOUue+VsO 5COX8RVOIHnUYpOQnPNgKxO+ZHNbA0k9XrPcBtKZyTCF1kqiubHJLHoIewy0ElusvgDFYK6yjG XvE=
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:03:50AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> But it's not just XENMEM_maximum_gpfn that's affected; that's just the
> one pointing out the underlying issue. Plus if so, shouldn't we avoid
> returning values that are going to be truncated (and, as can be seen
> here, then get perhaps recognized as error codes up the call chain)?
>
> > For now, I'd agree with trying to undo the change in OVMF.
>
> Anthony, thoughts?
I can map the shared_info page somewhere else, that fine. The hard part
is figuring out where. I can probably map it just after the guest RAM
(as described by the e820 from hvmloader or Xen).
--
Anthony PERARD
|
