On 12/4/2014 5:36 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
Hi,
At 17:01 +0800 on 04 Dec (1417708878), Yu, Zhang wrote:
I just noticed that in __hvm_copy()/__hvm_clear(), the grant types are
handled before the p2m_ram_ro - will return HVMCOPY_unhandleable. So if
p2m_is_discard_write() is supposed to replace the
Hi,
At 17:01 +0800 on 04 Dec (1417708878), Yu, Zhang wrote:
> I just noticed that in __hvm_copy()/__hvm_clear(), the grant types are
> handled before the p2m_ram_ro - will return HVMCOPY_unhandleable. So if
> p2m_is_discard_write() is supposed to replace the handling of
> p2m_ram_ro, handling o
On 12/2/2014 7:40 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 15:38 +0800 on 02 Dec (1417531126), Yu, Zhang wrote:
On 12/1/2014 8:13 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
During this bit of archaeology I realised that either this new type
On 12/2/2014 7:40 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 15:38 +0800 on 02 Dec (1417531126), Yu, Zhang wrote:
On 12/1/2014 8:13 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
During this bit of archaeology I realised that either this new type
>>> On 02.12.14 at 12:40, wrote:
> At 15:38 +0800 on 02 Dec (1417531126), Yu, Zhang wrote:
>> 2> p2m_grant_map_ro is also supposed to be discarded? Will handling of
>> this type of pages goes into __hvm_copy()/__hvm_clear(), or should?
>
> I think so, yes. At the moment we inject #GP when the g
At 15:38 +0800 on 02 Dec (1417531126), Yu, Zhang wrote:
> On 12/1/2014 8:13 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
> >>> During this bit of archaeology I realised that either this new type
> >>> should _not_ be made
>>> On 02.12.14 at 11:37, wrote:
> At 12:31 + on 01 Dec (1417433464), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 01.12.14 at 13:13, wrote:
>> > At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
>> >> > At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
At 12:31 + on 01 Dec (1417433464), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 01.12.14 at 13:13, wrote:
> > At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
> >> > At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >> >>> On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrot
>>> On 02.12.14 at 08:48, wrote:
>
> On 12/1/2014 8:31 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 01.12.14 at 13:13, wrote:
>>> At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
> At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 01.12
On 12/1/2014 8:31 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 13:13, wrote:
At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
To my understanding, pages with p2m_ram_ro
On 12/1/2014 8:13 PM, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
To my understanding, pages with p2m_ram_ro are not supposed to be
modified
>>> On 01.12.14 at 13:13, wrote:
> At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
>> > At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
>> >> > To my understanding, pages with p2m_ram_ro are not suppos
At 11:17 + on 01 Dec (1417429027), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
> > At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
> >> > To my understanding, pages with p2m_ram_ro are not supposed to be
> >> > modified by guest. So i
>>> On 01.12.14 at 11:30, wrote:
> At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
>> > To my understanding, pages with p2m_ram_ro are not supposed to be
>> > modified by guest. So in __hvm_copy(), when p2m type of a page is
>> > p2m_ram_rom, no cop
At 09:32 + on 01 Dec (1417422746), Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
> > On 11/28/2014 5:57 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 28.11.14 at 08:59, wrote:
> >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> >>> @@ -2838,7 +2838,8 @@ int hvm_hap_nested_page
>>> On 01.12.14 at 09:49, wrote:
> On 11/28/2014 5:57 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 28.11.14 at 08:59, wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>>> @@ -2838,7 +2838,8 @@ int hvm_hap_nested_page_fault(paddr_t gpa, unsigned
>>> long gla,
>>>* to the mmio h
On 11/28/2014 5:57 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 28.11.14 at 08:59, wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
@@ -2838,7 +2838,8 @@ int hvm_hap_nested_page_fault(paddr_t gpa, unsigned long
gla,
* to the mmio handler.
*/
if ( (p2mt == p2m_mmio_dm) ||
-
>>> On 28.11.14 at 08:59, wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -2838,7 +2838,8 @@ int hvm_hap_nested_page_fault(paddr_t gpa, unsigned
> long gla,
> * to the mmio handler.
> */
> if ( (p2mt == p2m_mmio_dm) ||
> - (npfec.write_access &&
XenGT (Intel Graphics Virtualization technology, please refer to
https://01.org/xen/blogs/srclarkx/2013/graphics-virtualization-
xengt) driver runs inside Dom0 as a virtual graphics device model,
and needs to trap and emulate the guest's write operations to some
specific memory pages, like memory p
19 matches
Mail list logo
