[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/5] x86/PV: remove the emulated PIT
El 14/01/16 a les 13.38, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>> On 14.01.16 at 11:59, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> El 14/01/16 a les 10.11, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>>>> On 14.01.16 at 09:25, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> El 13/01/16 a les 17.36, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>>>>>> On 13.01.16 at 13:32, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> The HVMlite series removed the initialization of the emulated PIT for PV >>>>>> guests, but the handler was still reachable, which means a PV guests can >>>>>> crash Xen if it pokes at IO ports 0x42, 0x43 or 0x61. Completely remove >>>>>> the >>>>>> PV PIT handler and move the PIT initialization to HVM guests only. >>>>> >>>>> As said on IRC - this is needed for Dom0 to be able to drive the >>>>> PC speaker. You'll need to provide a fix for the suppressed >>>>> initialization instead, at least for Dom0. (As an aside, your patch >>>>> orphans hwdom_pit_access().) >>>> >>>> Thanks for the clarification. AFAICT I can leave the usage of >>>> hwdom_pit_access for Dom0, and completely remove PIT access for DomU, is >>>> that right? >>> >>> I don't think so - see the explanation Tim gave on IRC. Afaict the >>> mention of BIOS here isn't related to a virtual BIOS, but to that >>> of a passed through graphics card. >> >> I'm sorry but I still don't fully understand why that's needed, and it >> arises a couple of questions. First of all, the only reference that I >> can find about BIOS and i8254 usage is regarding VGA BIOS POST [0], >> where they mention that the VGA POST method might make use of the i8254. >> >> This seems reasonable, but I still don't understand why we provide an >> emulated i8254 to DomUs. They don't have access to the low 1MB, which is >> where the VGA BIOS resides, so there's no way they can call into the VGA >> POST at all. > > All of this arrangement predates me, but see the original change > introducing this: "Provide PV guests with emulated PIT", which > suggests this wasn't just for Dom0. I'm hesitant to accept removal > of code when we don't know exactly by whom and for what purpose > it might be used. When I enabled Dom0 speaker control, I > intentionally retained the original code for DomU purposes. What about we do the following: enable the PIT for PV(H) guests (DomU/Dom0), and completely remove it for HVMlite guests for the moment? We might consider enabling it for HVMlite, but the plan is that this could be done on a per-domain basis using the flags in the xen_arch_domainconfig struct. Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |