Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/compat: Test whether guest has 32b shinfo instead of being a PV 32b domain

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 09.07.15 at 16:10, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/09/2015 03:02 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 08.07.15 at 22:57, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> As I started to update the patches I realized that in some cases
>>> (especially in arch_do_domctl():XEN_DOMCTL_get_address_size) we don't
>>> have VCPU (which is what hvm_guest_x86_mode() wants) but rather only the
>>> domain. d->vcpu[0] should work. Otherwise I'll either need a new field
>>> in struct domain or wrap has_32bit_shinfo into something PVH-specific,
>>> like is_32bit_pvh_vcpu().
>> Shouldn't XEN_DOMCTL_get_address_size be handled HVM-like
>> for PVH, especially if you also intend the tools to use the 64-bit
>> guest context variant even for 32-bit PVH? Once again - are you
>> intending to prohibit 32-bit PVH switching to 64-bit mode (which
>> would seem both wrong and possibly cumbersome to me)?
> 
> With current PVH implementation I don't think we can switch. We are 
> starting the guest in very much PV-like fashion. That's why we are 
> getting into switch_compat() --- via XEN_DOMCTL_set_address_size.
> 
> For XEN_DOMCTL_get_address_size specifically we need to be able to 
> figure out the mode *before* the guest is running because we use it to 
> set cpuid bits in xc_cpuid_pv_policy(). So just that means we can't 
> change the mode.

Okay - but is there code (being put) in place to refuse switch
attempts?

Jan


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