[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] about fully UMIP support in Xen
On 4/19/2017 10:09 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: On 19/04/17 15:07, Jan Beulich wrote:On 19.04.17 at 15:58, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 19/04/17 14:50, Yu Zhang wrote:On 4/19/2017 9:34 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:On 19.04.17 at 13:44, <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 4/19/2017 7:19 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:On 19.04.17 at 11:48, <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Does hypervisor need to differentiate dom0 kernel and its user space?If we want to para-virtualize the feature, then yes. Otherwise we can't assume the guest kernel would deal with user mode faults, so we'd have to. Arguably there could be a non-default mode in which we don't (forcing such applications to get a signal or crash).For UMIP is to be para-virtualized, is it OK to give dom0 kernel the physical value if instructions are triggered in the kernel?Why would you want to special case Dom0 here? I don't see anything wrong with giving Dom0 the real values, but since you'll have to not give DomU-s the real values, you'd then add more code to treat Dom0 specially. Simply give everyone fake values.Oh. So in such case should return 0 to the dom0 kernel I guess? Here come a dumb question: does other pv domain also run in ring 3 in vmx root mode, or simply in vmx non-root ring 0? :)PV guests execute exclusively in non-root mode.In root mode, you mean.I do. (oops. Sorry.) Thanks a lot, Andrew & Jan.And back to the schedule of this feature, are you working on it? Or any specific plan? Is there anything we can do here in Intel? B.R. Yu ~AndrewJan32bit PV guest kernels execute in ring 1. 64bit PV guest kernels execute in ring 3. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |