[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 12/15] x86/hyperlaunch: specify dom0 mode with device tree
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: "Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:31:12 -0500
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=apertussolutions.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dmarc=pass header.from=<dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1733934678; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=Olq2bonr4k+ZwG6WegzbYkZheckvZONs+NRQZPix5e8=; b=FVcKkX9/qcp+dvLTP8jrFZFsgRLUlm4PYE/AsoY2NSFdXzvvSWwq/iTL4ZJB73GFSTaLL77sA1RGk/JzFkQxzP6VkrpDmKzKAm+T9G7Ak6rgMwHAOcRjZPYzpIPlxgrDNHsGNUG8svrotalKkiFDNPHZ2sXBkzSyWmkYJ8ZpXuI=
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1733934678; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=hI2lXc/6Fpg/yNSiQdrgDkyVg4tJ5U1PVq6wJnc4YfmJ7NiFtgQQ3rJvqFutJo3JTXfzDMV92QG2/nQ2uT7fP670cPI/fApqRRilVNopsvVExpw1/YM6dnKUj4mDVRaX4dv7a3HTqRQIn3J77kDYafF64bO+bzu2DPHU7kC+J5E=
- Cc: jason.andryuk@xxxxxxx, christopher.w.clark@xxxxxxxxx, stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:31:34 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 12/2/24 07:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 23.11.2024 19:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
@@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
}
+ if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
+ {
+ if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
+ {
+ printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
+ name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ printk(" mode: ");
+ if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
Nit: Brace placement.
Ack.
+ if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
+ printk("HVM\n");
+ else
+ printk("PVH\n");
+ }
+ else
+ printk("PV\n");
+ }
}
fdt_for_each_subnode(node, fdt, dom_node)
--- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
@@ -18,6 +18,12 @@ struct boot_domain {
domid_t domid;
+ /* On | Off */
+#define BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT (1 << 0) /* PV | PVH/HVM */
+#define BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM (1 << 1) /* HVM | PVH */
+#define BUILD_MODE_LONG (1 << 2) /* 64 BIT | 32 BIT */
This last one isn't used anywhere, is it?
Hmm, I may have lost this when AMD asked for PVH to be done this cycle.
It should still be used to allow for 32bit PV dom0, will get this added in.
--- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
@@ -1006,7 +1006,8 @@ static struct domain *__init create_dom0(struct boot_info
*bi)
struct boot_domain *bd = &bi->domains[0];
struct domain *d;
- if ( opt_dom0_pvh )
+ if ( opt_dom0_pvh ||
+ (bi->hyperlaunch_enabled && !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT)) )
{
dom0_cfg.flags |= (XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm |
((hvm_hap_supported() && !opt_dom0_shadow) ?
What about BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM?
Good point, a goal for HL was to enable building and booting with
separate hwdom and ctldom.
v/r,
dps
|
