[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Xen PVH support in grub2
On 03/11/17 15:36, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 11/03/2017 10:24 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 03/11/17 15:07, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 01:50:11PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>> On 03/11/17 13:17, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 01:00:46PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>> On 29/09/17 17:51, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 03:33:58PM +0000, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>>>> On 29/09/17 17:24, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 02:46:53PM +0000, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>>>>> Then, I also wonder whether it would make sense for this grub to load >>>>>>>>> the kernel using the PVH entry point or the native entry point. Would >>>>>>>>> it be possible to boot a Linux kernel up to the point where cpuid can >>>>>>>>> be used inside of a PVH container? >>>>>>>> I don't think today's Linux allows that. This has been discussed >>>>>>>> very thoroughly at the time Boris added PVH V2 support to the kernel. >>>>>>> OK, I'm not going to insist on that, but my plans for FreeBSD is to >>>>>>> make the native entry point capable of booting inside of a PVH >>>>>>> container up to the point where cpuid (or whatever method) can be used >>>>>>> to detect the environment. >>>>>> Looking more thoroughly into the Linux boot code I think this could >>>>>> work for Linux, too. But only if we can tell PVH from HVM in the guest. >>>>>> How would you do that in FreeBSD? Via flags in the boot params? This >>>>>> would the have to be done in the boot loader (e.g. grub or OVMF). >>>>> My plan was not to differentiate between HVM and PVH, but rather to >>>>> make use of the ACPI information in order to decide which devices are >>>>> available and which are not inside of a PVH guest. >>>>> >>>>> For example in the FADT "IA-PC Boot Architecture Flags" field for PVH >>>>> we already set "VGA Not Present" and "CMOS RTC Not Present". There >>>>> might be other flags/fields that must be set, but I would like to >>>>> avoid having a CPUID bit or similar saying "PVH", because then Xen >>>>> will be tied to always providing the same set of devices in PVH >>>>> containers. >>>> Why? This would depend on the semantics tied to the flag. It could just >>>> mean "don't assume availability of legacy stuff" (e.g. BIOS calls). >>>> >>>> Linux would have a problem with the ACPI approach as it would try BIOS >>>> calls way before it is initializing its ACPI handling. So in Linux I'd >>>> need another way to tell I'm running in PVH mode, e.g. a "no legacy" >>>> bit in the Xen HVM cpuid leaf. >>> If you are booted from the PVH entry point, there's no BIOS or UEFI >>> (ie: no firmware), if you are booted from the BIOS entry point there's >>> a BIOS and the same applies to UEFI. How does Linux differentiate >>> whether it's booted from BIOS or UEFI? >> They use different entries. > > In fact, we had a discussion with Matt Fleming (Linux EFI maintainer) to > see if we can use EFI entry point to also be able to boot PVH guest but > found some issues with that approach, which is why we ended up with a > dedicated PVH entry point. > > I am curious though, Juergen --- what do we need besides zeropage to > allow us to boot PVH from startup_64? Oh, you are right. I managed to get lost in the early boot paths. Only setting up the hyperpage seems to be missing, but this should be doable. And setting xen_pvh, of course. Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |