|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 9/16]: PVH xen: create PVH vmcs and initialization
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:56:39 +0000
"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On 12.01.13 at 02:59, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c Fri Jan 11 16:31:33 2013 -0800
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c Fri Jan 11 16:32:36 2013 -0800
> > @@ -331,6 +331,9 @@ void hvm_do_resume(struct vcpu *v)
> > {
> > ioreq_t *p;
> >
> > + if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) )
> > + return;
>
> Better avoid the call at the call site?
Done.
> > @@ -697,6 +697,246 @@ void vmx_vmcs_switch(struct vmcs_struct
> > spin_unlock(&vmx->vmcs_lock);
> > }
> >
> > +static noinline int pvh_construct_vmcs(struct vcpu *v)
> > +{
>
> This looks a lot like the "normal" HVM function - can't those be
> folded reasonably, to reduce redundancy?
>
> > @@ -1156,6 +1404,9 @@ void vmx_do_resume(struct vcpu *v)
> > hvm_asid_flush_vcpu(v);
> > }
> >
> > + if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) )
> > + goto skip_inteLdbgr; /* PVH supports gdbsx and gdb
> > inside PVH */
>
> What do "inte", "L", and "dbgr" stand for here? Also, to me the
> comment doesn't really explain anything.
I understand the code is for some external intel debugger. I meant
intel_dbgr. PVH, btw, is supported at the moment by gdbsx and gdb
running inside the PVH guest. Anyways, got rid of the label:
if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v)
reset_stack_and_jump(vmx_asm_do_vmentry);
debug_state = v->domain->debugger_attached
......
thanks,
Mukesh
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |