Re: [PATCH 3/7] tools/xl: Add max_altp2m parameter

[Petr Beneš <w1benny@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 8:19 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 24.04.2024 22:42, Petr Beneš wrote:
> > Introduce a new max_altp2m parameter to control the maximum number of altp2m
> > views a domain can use. By default, if max_altp2m is unspecified and altp2m 
> > is
> > enabled, the value is set to 10, reflecting the legacy behavior.
>
> Apart from the public header you don't even touch hypervisor code here. What
> you say above therefore is limited in scope to the tool stack. I question
> though that adding a new field without respecting it constitutes an overall
> consistent change. In particular I'm curious how you mean to deal with this
> for other than x86, where altp2m as a concept doesn't exist (yet).
>
> > --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> > +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
> > @@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ struct xen_domctl_createdomain {
> >       */
> >      uint32_t max_vcpus;
> >      uint32_t max_evtchn_port;
> > +    uint32_t max_altp2m;
> >      int32_t max_grant_frames;
> >      int32_t max_maptrack_frames;
>
> Such a struct layout change needs to be accompanied by an interface version
> bump (which hasn't happened so far in this release cycle, afaics).
>
> Jan

So I should not include domctl.h changes in this commit and instead
edit the commit message that it's merely a preparation for the
following commit.
Then, move the xen_domctl_createdomain field creation to the commit
with the hypervisor changes (+ include interface version bump) and
then create an additional commit that ties xl and xen together.

Do I understand it correctly?