[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.5 v6 00/16] Xen VMware tools support
On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 16:38 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 09/22/2014 04:34 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 16:19 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > >> On 09/22/2014 02:56 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > >>> On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 14:07 -0400, Don Slutz wrote: > >>> > >>>> I picked this subset to start with because it only has changes in > >>>> Xen. > >>>> > >>>> Some of this code is already in QEMU > >>> As I suggest in my reply to one for the rpc port patches it's not clear > >>> that any of this needs to be in Xen rather than qemu in the first place. > >>> > >>> I came to think this even more once I saw the save/restore support... > >> I don't think qemu can get notified on either cpuid or #GP faults, can it? > > I understand the need for the cpuid bits, I should have made that clear. > > > >> A big chunk of the functionality here is to allow a userspace process to > >> transparently make the "hypercalls" without the OS needing to explicitly > >> give it access to the IO space, by trapping the resulting #GP faults and > >> checking to see if they are IO instructions . If that's functionality > >> we think is important, then it will have to be done in Xen, I think. > > Ah, the need to #GP was what I had missed, I was thinking it was just a > > regular I/O port access. > > > > Having trapped the #GP and decoded it into an IO access, is there > > anything stopping us forwarding that to qemu for consideration? > > > > (I confess I'm not sure why this is a #GP thing and not a VTd/SVM I/O > > access trap, just like if userspace mmaps /dev/ioports, but I'll trust > > that's just my lack of x86 hw virt knowledge) > > I'm not 100% sure of this, but my understanding was that it *would* be a > normal IO trap *if* the guest OS gave access to that IO range to the > guest (via IOPL, maybe?). But if the userspace program is not > explicitly given access by the OS to those ports, it will generate a #GP > instead. The idea is to allow the "hypercall" to happen *without > cooperation* from the guest OS. > > Again, that's my understanding, someone please correct me if I'm wrong... It sounds plausible, for sure. Even so, why can't the result of that #GP be a calldown into qemu for further processing? Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |