[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Why does xc_map_foreign_range() refuse to map pfns below 1M from a domU
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 10:31 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 04.12.13 at 11:24, Tomasz Wroblewski <tomasz.wroblewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> wrote: > > On 12/03/2013 08:07 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 06:36:48PM +0100, Tomasz Wroblewski wrote: > >>> On 12/03/2013 05:09 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > >>>> On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 17:59 +0200, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: > >>>>>>> The Linux domU is perfectly able to map (using xc_map_foreign_range()) > >>>>>>> pages from the Windows domU, except for pages below 1M. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> With no XSM how does it have the privilege to do this? > >>>>> > >>>>> What I meant to say is that the domU is being allowed to do this sort > >>>>> of thing, i.e. the problem is definitely not caused by XSM. > >>>> > >>>> OK, so XSM is involved but you are 101% certain that it is not > >>>> preventing the mappings? > >>>> > >>> We've ran into this issue in xenclient recently too, when we finally > >>> upgraded stubdomain's kernel to pvops version. It seems pvops kernel > >>> contains safeguard to only allow <1M mappings if it's dom0 > >>> (xen_initial_domain()). This check is placed in arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: > >>> > >>> static pte_t xen_make_pte(pteval_t pte) > >>> { > >>> phys_addr_t addr = (pte & PTE_PFN_MASK); > >>> > >>> ... > >>> /* > >>> * Unprivileged domains are allowed to do IOMAPpings for > >>> * PCI passthrough, but not map ISA space. The ISA > >>> * mappings are just dummy local mappings to keep other > >>> * parts of the kernel happy. > >>> */ > >>> if (unlikely(pte & _PAGE_IOMAP) && > >>> (xen_initial_domain() || addr >= ISA_END_ADDRESS)) { > >>> pte = iomap_pte(pte); > >>> } else { > >>> pte &= ~_PAGE_IOMAP; > >>> pte = pte_pfn_to_mfn(pte); > >>> } > >>> > >>> return native_make_pte(pte); > >>> } > >>> > >>> We patched this out (in a fugly and probably not very correct way), > >>> for our stubdomain kernel, since we needed our stubdomain qemu vms > >>> to be able to map windows guest <1M range (since qemu needs to be > >>> able to write data and read data there in order to chat with seabios > >>> etc). Maybe Konrad (CC'ed) knows why the check is there in guest > >>> kernel, and a good way to solve this. > >> > >> For PV domU guests the ISA are usually RAM - so you don't want during > >> early bootup of a PV guest for it to scan MFNs it does not have access > >> to. Granted it does not have access to them but it would have the > >> MFNs coded in and any access to that area will result in .. Xen > >> "fixing" up the PTEs (I can't recall exaclty how). > >> > >> If you boot a PV Guest and remove the: > >> (xen_initial_domain() || addr >= ISA_END_ADDRESS)) { > >> > >> do you see anything that in the Xen console? > >> > > I recall I wasn't seeing anything, the pv domU was just hanging super early > > in the boot then. The way we worked around it is via attached > > patch (applied to PV domU's kernel, in our case stubdom hosting qemu > > process). It keeps the <1M safeguard for local mapping but allows > > foreign mappings (detected via _PAGE_SPECIAL flag). > > I've been following this thread, with each new response making it > less clear what is being talked about here: The original request > was to map the MFN backing a guest's PFN below 1M. That says > nothing about the value of the MFN (and iirc Xen doesn't allocate > MFNs from the first 1M to any guest on x86). Yet the safe guard > ought to be dealing with a specific MFN range only. > > Can someone explain what I'm missing here? I believe the intention is to catch domain 0's 1:1 mapping of the first 1M of host RAM. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |