Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86: Adjust stack pointer in xen_sysexit

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:50:19PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Boris Ostrovsky
> <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 11/16/2015 03:22 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:11:11PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >>
> >>> Are there really multiple feature bits for this stuff?  I'd like to
> >>> imagine that the entry code is all either Xen PV or native/PVH/PVHVM
> >>> -- i.e. I assumed that PVH works like native for all entries.
> >
> >
> >
> > Almost. For PVH we will have a small stub to set up bootparams and such but
> > then we jump to startup_{32|64} code.
> >
> >
> >> I just reacted to Boris' statement:
> >>
> >> "We don't currently have a Xen-specific CPU feature. We could, in
> >> principle, add it but we can't replace all of current paravirt patching
> >> with a single feature since PVH guests use a subset of existing pv ops
> >> (and in the future it may become even more fine-grained)."
> >
> >
> > Actually, nevermind this --- I was thinking about APIC ops and they are not
> > pv ops.
> >
> > Note though that there are other users of pv ops --- lguest and looks like
> > KVM (for one op) use them too.
> >
> 
> Honestly, I think we should just delete lguest some time soon.  And
> KVM uses this stuff so lightly that we shouldn't need all of the pvop
> stuff.  (In fact, I'm slowly working on removing KVM_GUEST's
> dependency on PARAVIRT.)

Even for the pvclock?

(sorry for stealing this thread on this subject).

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