[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH V3 2/2] qemu: support xen hvm direct kernel boot
On Fri, 20 Jun 2014, Chunyan Liu wrote: > qemu side patch to support xen HVM direct kernel boot: > if -kernel exists, calls xen_load_linux(), which will read kernel/initrd > and add a linuxboot.bin or multiboot.bin option rom. The > linuxboot.bin/multiboot.bin will load kernel/initrd and jump to execute > kernel directly. It's working when xen uses seabios. > > Signed-off-by: Chunyan Liu <cyliu@xxxxxxxx> > --- > hw/i386/pc.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > hw/i386/pc_piix.c | 7 +++++++ > hw/i386/xen/xen_apic.c | 1 + > include/hw/i386/pc.h | 5 +++++ > 4 files changed, 35 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c > index 3e0ecf1..e005136 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c > @@ -1183,6 +1183,28 @@ void pc_acpi_init(const char *default_dsdt) > } > } > > +FWCfgState *xen_load_linux(const char *kernel_filename, > + const char *kernel_cmdline, > + const char *initrd_filename, > + ram_addr_t below_4g_mem_size, > + PcGuestInfo *guest_info) > +{ > + int i; > + FWCfgState *fw_cfg; > + > + assert(kernel_filename != NULL); > + > + fw_cfg = fw_cfg_init(BIOS_CFG_IOPORT, BIOS_CFG_IOPORT + 1, 0, 0); Is it actually OK to initialize just BIOS_CFG_IOPORT and avoid everything else currently done in bochs_bios_init? Would it make sense to simply call bochs_bios_init? > + rom_set_fw(fw_cfg); > + > + load_linux(fw_cfg, kernel_filename, initrd_filename, kernel_cmdline, > below_4g_mem_size); > + for (i = 0; i < nb_option_roms; i++) { > + rom_add_option(option_rom[i].name, option_rom[i].bootindex); > + } Wouldn't this have the unintended consequence of possibly loading other option_roms into the guest memory? > + guest_info->fw_cfg = fw_cfg; > + return fw_cfg; > +} > + > FWCfgState *pc_memory_init(MemoryRegion *system_memory, > const char *kernel_filename, > const char *kernel_cmdline, > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > index a48e263..b737868 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > +++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > @@ -158,6 +158,13 @@ static void pc_init1(MachineState *machine, > machine->initrd_filename, > below_4g_mem_size, above_4g_mem_size, > rom_memory, &ram_memory, guest_info); > + } else if (machine->kernel_filename != NULL) { > + /* For xen HVM direct kernel boot, load linux here */ > + fw_cfg = xen_load_linux(machine->kernel_filename, > + machine->kernel_cmdline, > + machine->initrd_filename, > + below_4g_mem_size, > + guest_info); > } > > gsi_state = g_malloc0(sizeof(*gsi_state)); > diff --git a/hw/i386/xen/xen_apic.c b/hw/i386/xen/xen_apic.c > index 63bb7f7..f5acd6a 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/xen/xen_apic.c > +++ b/hw/i386/xen/xen_apic.c > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static void xen_apic_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) > { > APICCommonState *s = APIC_COMMON(dev); > > + s->vapic_control = 0; > memory_region_init_io(&s->io_memory, OBJECT(s), &xen_apic_io_ops, s, > "xen-apic-msi", APIC_SPACE_SIZE); Why this change? It is not mentioned in the commit message. > diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h > index ca7a0bd..171a597 100644 > --- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h > +++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h > @@ -134,6 +134,11 @@ PcGuestInfo *pc_guest_info_init(ram_addr_t > below_4g_mem_size, > void pc_pci_as_mapping_init(Object *owner, MemoryRegion *system_memory, > MemoryRegion *pci_address_space); > > +FWCfgState *xen_load_linux(const char *kernel_filename, > + const char *kernel_cmdline, > + const char *initrd_filename, > + ram_addr_t below_4g_mem_size, > + PcGuestInfo *guest_info); > FWCfgState *pc_memory_init(MemoryRegion *system_memory, > const char *kernel_filename, > const char *kernel_cmdline, > -- > 1.8.4.5 > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |