Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 20/20] libxl/acpi: Build ACPI tables for HVMlite guests

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 10:48:52AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 07/08/2016 06:55 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
> >
> >> +
> >> +    /* Map page that will hold RSDP */
> >> +    extent = RSDP_ADDRESS >> ctxt.page_shift;
> >> +    rc = populate_acpi_pages(dom, &extent, 1, &ctxt);
> >> +    if (rc) {
> >> +        LOG(ERROR, "%s: populate_acpi_pages for rsdp failed with %d",
> >> +            __FUNCTION__, rc);
> >> +        goto out;
> >> +    }
> >> +    config.rsdp = (unsigned long)xc_map_foreign_range(xch, domid,
> >> +                                                      ctxt.page_size,
> >> +                                                      PROT_READ | 
> >> PROT_WRITE,
> >> +                                                      RSDP_ADDRESS >> 
> >> ctxt.page_shift);
> > I think with Anthony's on-going work you should be more flexible for all
> > you tables.
> 
> Not sure I understand what you mean here. You want the address
> (RSDP_ADDRESS) to be a variable as opposed to a macro?
> 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the possible interaction between
Anthony's work and your work.

Anthony's work allows dynamically loading of firmware blobs. If you use
a fixed address, theoretically it can clash with firmware blobs among
other things libxc can load. The high address is a safe bet so that
probably won't happen in practice.

Anthony's work allows loading arbitrary blobs actually. Can you take
advantage of that mechanism as well? That is, to specify all your tables
as modules and let libxc handle actually loading them  into guest
memory.

Does this make sense?

Also CC Anthony here.

> >
> > I haven't really looked into details for this patch. Let's sort out
> > the linkage issue between GPLv2 cod and LGPL code first.
> 
> 
> Ugh.. Yes, this one didn't even cross my mind until you brought it up
> yesterday.
> 
> What are the options? Can we dual-license those files as GPLv2/LGPL,
> assuming copyright holders --- Keir (or Citrix?) and Intel --- agree?
> 

I don't claim I know much about licenses. Let's discuss this issue in
the other thread instead of having two threads.

I think what Ian said makes sense FWIW.

Wei.

> -boris

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