[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] xen/vioapic: add support for the extended destination ID field
On 16.02.2022 11:30, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > Such field uses bits 55:48, but for the purposes the register will be > used use bits 55:49 instead. Bit 48 is used to signal an RTE entry is > in remappable format which is not supported by the vIO-APIC. Nit: The first sentence looks to have some stray words. > --- a/tools/include/libxl.h > +++ b/tools/include/libxl.h > @@ -527,6 +527,14 @@ > */ > #define LIBXL_HAVE_MAX_GRANT_VERSION 1 > > +/* > + * LIBXL_HAVE_X86_EXT_DEST_ID indicates the toolstack can signal to the > + * hypervisor whether the domain wants to use the extended destination ID > mode > + * for interrupt messages. This is done by setting the > libxl_domain_build_info > + * arch_x86.ext_dest_id field. > + */ > +#define LIBXL_HAVE_X86_EST_DEST_ID 1 Did you mean LIBXL_HAVE_X86_EXT_DEST_ID, as the comment has it? > --- a/tools/libs/light/libxl_types.idl > +++ b/tools/libs/light/libxl_types.idl > @@ -648,6 +648,7 @@ libxl_domain_build_info = Struct("domain_build_info",[ > ("vuart", libxl_vuart_type), > ])), > ("arch_x86", Struct(None, [("msr_relaxed", libxl_defbool), > + ("ext_dest_id", libxl_defbool), Let's hope there's not going to appear any other meaning of "dest ID". I would have suggested to add "apic" to the name, but this would get it a little longish for my taste. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c > @@ -782,6 +782,7 @@ static struct domain *__init create_dom0(const module_t > *image, > > dom0_cfg.arch.emulation_flags |= > XEN_X86_EMU_LAPIC | XEN_X86_EMU_IOAPIC | XEN_X86_EMU_VPCI; > + dom0_cfg.arch.misc_flags |= XEN_X86_EXT_DEST_ID; > } Without any way to suppress this? > --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h > +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h > @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ > #include "hvm/save.h" > #include "memory.h" > > -#define XEN_DOMCTL_INTERFACE_VERSION 0x00000014 > +#define XEN_DOMCTL_INTERFACE_VERSION 0x00000015 I'm struggling to figure which binary incompatible change in here requires this bumping. Does this perhaps belong in a later patch? Jan
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |