Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v12 0/8] Xen VMware tools support

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 09:40:59AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.06.15 at 01:27, <don.slutz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Changes v11 to v12:
> >   Rebased on staging.
> > 
> >   Jan Beulich (xen: Add ring 3 vmware_port support)
> >     As there don't seem to be enough convincing arguments for this
> >     to be worthwhile, I'm going to drop this...
> >       Dropped the 2 ring3 patches.
> > 
> >   Ian Campbell (tools: Add vmware_hwver support):
> >     s/come/comes/
> >       Done
> >     I'm not sure this hunk has anything to do with this patch, nor
> >     what the semantic difference between the old and new text is
> >     supposed to be.
> >       Dropped comment change.
> > 
> >   Ian Campbell (multiple):
> >     In v11 this seems to have morphed into only
> >     LIBXL_HAVE_LIBXL_VGA_INTERFACE_TYPE_VMWARE being provided, which
> >     is clearly not an appropriate umbrella #define.
> > 
> >     "#define LIBXL_HAVE_CREATEINFO_VMWARE 1"
> >     Lets just have a single one of these indicating support for
> >     vmware, it should be added at the end of the series after all
> >     the baseline vmware functionality is in place. I think that
> >     means hwver, vga=vmware and this port stuff.
> > 
> >       Make (tools: Add vga=vmware) no longer independent.
> >       Change the #define to "LIBXL_HAVE_VMWARE"
> > 
> >    Jan Beulich (xen: Add vmware_port support):
> >      Surrounding code avoiding the use of "break" makes the result
> >      look rather inconsistent. Please move this up immediately after
> >      the XSM check, or drop the "break".
> >        Moved it up.
> > 
> >    George Dunlap (Add IOREQ_TYPE_VMWARE_PORT):
> >      Sorry for coming a bit late to this party.  On a high level I
> >      think this is good, but there doesn't seem to be anything in
> >      here in particular that is vmware-specific.  Would it make more
> >      sense to give this a more generic name, and have it include all
> >      of the general-purpose registers?
> >        Did not change at this time because QEMU would need changes 1st.
> > 
> >    George Dunlap (Add xentrace to vmware_port):
> >      Do you need to log edi as well? It looks like it's not used.
> >        I think it makes sense to indicate that edi can be used and
> >        may in the future.
> >      And do you need to log all the registers here?  It seems like
> >      port + regs->_ecx would be enough to tell you why it got
> >      ignored.
> >         Adjusted to log just port and eax (ecx was NOT tested for).
> 
> I was actually meaning to apply this (at least until patch 6; I'm
> not convinced patch 7 makes sense to go in at this point), but
> noticed that comments by Konrad were still un-addressed. I'm
> also expecting some re-basing to be needed on top of Paul's
> emulation re-work.
> 
> Wei, considering that this had already missed 4.5, would you
> be okay to take at least first 6 patches (which seem reasonably
> risk free) after the freeze?
> 

Yes. I think it is fine, but please do it as soon as possible,
preferably within next week.

Wei.

> Jan

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