[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH V3 4/6] xen/unpopulated-alloc: Add mechanism to use Xen resource
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021, Oleksandr wrote: > > > Please note the following: > > > for V3 arch_xen_unpopulated_init() was moved to init() as was agreed > > > and gained __init specifier. So the target_resource is initialized there. > > > > > > With current patch series applied if CONFIG_XEN_UNPOPULATED_ALLOC > > > is enabled: > > > > > > 1. On Arm, under normal circumstances, the xen_alloc_unpopulated_pages() > > > won't be called “before” arch_xen_unpopulated_init(). It will only be > > > called "before" when either ACPI is in use or something wrong happened > > > with DT (and we failed to read xen_grant_frames), so we fallback to > > > xen_xlate_map_ballooned_pages() in arm/xen/enlighten.c:xen_guest_init(), > > > please see "arm/xen: Switch to use gnttab_setup_auto_xlat_frames() for DT" > > > for details. But in that case, I think, it doesn't matter much whether > > > xen_alloc_unpopulated_pages() is called "before" of "after" > > > target_resource > > > initialization, as we don't have extended regions in place the > > > target_resource > > > will remain invalid even after initialization, so > > > xen_alloc_ballooned_pages() > > > will be used in both scenarios. > > > > > > 2. On x86, I am not quite sure which modes use unpopulated-alloc (PVH?), > > > but it looks like xen_alloc_unpopulated_pages() can (and will) be called > > > “before” arch_xen_unpopulated_init(). > > > At least, I see that xen_xlate_map_ballooned_pages() is called in > > > x86/xen/grant-table.c:xen_pvh_gnttab_setup(). According to the initcall > > > levels for both xen_pvh_gnttab_setup() and init() I expect the former > > > to be called earlier. > > > If it is true, the sentence in the commit description which mentions > > > that “behaviour on x86 is not changed” is not precise. I don’t think > > > it would be correct to fallback to xen_alloc_ballooned_pages() just > > > because we haven’t initialized target_resource yet (on x86 it is just > > > assigning it iomem_resource), at least this doesn't look like an expected > > > behaviour and unlikely would be welcome. > > > > > > I am wondering whether it would be better to move > > > arch_xen_unpopulated_init() > > > to a dedicated init() marked with an appropriate initcall level > > > (early_initcall?) > > > to make sure it will always be called *before* > > > xen_xlate_map_ballooned_pages(). > > > What do you think? > > ... here (#2). Or I really missed something and there wouldn't be an issue? Yes, I see your point. Yeah, it makes sense to make sure that drivers/xen/unpopulated-alloc.c:init is executed before xen_pvh_gnttab_setup. If we move it to early_initcall, then we end up running it before xen_guest_init on ARM. But that might be fine: it looks like it should work OK and would also allow us to execute xen_xlate_map_ballooned_pages with target_resource already set. So I'd say go for it :)
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |