Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 33/38] arm/p2m: Add altp2m paging mechanism

[Sergej Proskurin <proskurin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Julien,


On 09/13/2016 05:08 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
> On 13/09/16 16:06, Sergej Proskurin wrote:
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> +    p2m_read_unlock(hp2m);
>>>> +
>>>> +    return true;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>  static inline void altp2m_reset(struct p2m_domain *p2m)
>>>>  {
>>>>      p2m_write_lock(p2m);
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
>>>> index 0bf1653..a4c923c 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
>>>> @@ -48,6 +48,8 @@
>>>>  #include <asm/vgic.h>
>>>>  #include <asm/cpuerrata.h>
>>>>
>>>> +#include <asm/altp2m.h>
>>>> +
>>>>  /* The base of the stack must always be double-word aligned, which
>>>> means
>>>>   * that both the kernel half of struct cpu_user_regs (which is
>>>> pushed in
>>>>   * entry.S) and struct cpu_info (which lives at the bottom of a Xen
>>>> @@ -2397,6 +2399,24 @@ static inline bool hpfar_is_valid(bool s1ptw,
>>>> uint8_t fsc)
>>>>      return s1ptw || (fsc == FSC_FLT_TRANS &&
>>>> !check_workaround_834220());
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +static bool_t try_handle_altp2m(struct vcpu *v,
>>>> +                                paddr_t gpa,
>>>> +                                struct npfec npfec)
>>>
>>> I am not convinced about the usefulness of this function.
>>>
>>
>> Your call. However, I believe it is better to have the altp2m handling
>> routine at one place.
>
> Then, why it is not done in altp2m_lazy_copy?

Alright, I will remove the function.

Cheers,
~Sergej

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