[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/16] xenhost support
On 2019-06-07 9:21 a.m., Juergen Gross wrote: On 07.06.19 17:22, Joao Martins wrote:On 6/7/19 3:51 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:Just to be clear: By "kind of passthrough hypercall" you mean (e.g. for every access/modify of grant table frames) you would proxy hypercall to L0 Xen via L1 Xen?On 09.05.19 19:25, Ankur Arora wrote:Hi all, This is an RFC for xenhost support, outlined here by Juergen here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/8/67.First: thanks for all the effort you've put into this series!The high level idea is to provide an abstraction of the Xen communication interface, as a xenhost_t. xenhost_t expose ops for communication between the guest and Xen(hypercall, cpuid, shared_info/vcpu_info, evtchn, grant-table and on topof those, xenbus, ballooning), and these can differ based on the kind of underlying Xen: regular, local, and nested.I'm not sure we need to abstract away hypercalls and cpuid. I believe in case of nested Xen all contacts to the L0 hypervisor should be done via the L1 hypervisor. So we might need to issue some kind of passthrough hypercall when e.g. granting a page to L0 dom0, but this should be handled via the grant abstraction (events should be similar).It might be possible to spare some hypercalls by directly writing to grant frames mapped into L1 dom0, but in general you are right. Wouldn't we still need map/unmap_grant_ref? AFAICS, both the xenhost_direct and the xenhost_indirect cases should be very similar (apart from the need to proxy in the indirect case.) Ankur Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |