Re: [Xen-devel] [V10 PATCH 14/23] PVH xen: additional changes to support PVH guest creation and execution.

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20/08/13 22:32, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 15:13:10 +0100
> George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Mukesh Rathor
> > <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c
> > > index bff05d9..19a085c 100644
> > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c
> > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/hap/hap.c
> > > @@ -639,7 +639,9 @@ static void hap_update_cr3(struct vcpu *v, int
> > > do_locking) const struct paging_mode *
> > >   hap_paging_get_mode(struct vcpu *v)
> > >   {
> > > -    return !hvm_paging_enabled(v)   ? &hap_paging_real_mode :
> > > +    /* PVH 32bitfixme. */
> > > +    return is_pvh_vcpu(v)        ? &hap_paging_long_mode :
> > > +        !hvm_paging_enabled(v)   ? &hap_paging_real_mode :
> > >           hvm_long_mode_enabled(v) ? &hap_paging_long_mode :
> > >           hvm_pae_enabled(v)       ? &hap_paging_pae_mode  :
> > >                                      &hap_paging_protected_mode;
> > This shouldn't be necessary, right?  The PVH code should ensure that
> > for 64-bit PVH guests, hvm_long_mode_enabled() is always true, right?
> Right, 64bit PVH always will be in long mode. However, with 32bit PVH,
> this check will change, so best to leave it here.
How will it change?  In that case, won't hvm_long_mode() return false, 
but hvm_pae_enabled() return true, and you'll get hap_paging_pae_mode 
(which I assume is what you would want)?
In any case, if it's not needed now, it shouldn't be introduced now.  
I've taken it out of my copy.
 -George

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