On 06/02/2016 12:38 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 02.06.16 at 10:26, wrote:
>> On 06/02/2016 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> The criteria for inclusion or exclusion should
>>> follow a predictable model. I.e. if someone comes along and says
>>> "I need register Y", then there should be rules tha
>>> On 02.06.16 at 10:26, wrote:
> On 06/02/2016 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The criteria for inclusion or exclusion should
>> follow a predictable model. I.e. if someone comes along and says
>> "I need register Y", then there should be rules that (s)he can apply
>> up front to determine what
On 06/02/2016 10:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> The criteria for inclusion or exclusion should
> follow a predictable model. I.e. if someone comes along and says
> "I need register Y", then there should be rules that (s)he can apply
> up front to determine what (at least in the vast majority of cases)
>>> On 01.06.16 at 21:34, wrote:
> On 06/01/16 21:21, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
Once an ABI is set in stone, and if that ABI allows for optimizations
(by consumers) like the one mentioned, I do
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Tamas,
>
>
> On 01/06/16 19:21, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
>
>
On 01/06/16 20:38, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Tamas,
On 01/06/16 19:21, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall
wrote:
Hi,
On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
On 30.05.16 at 21:47,
Hi Razvan,
On 01/06/16 20:34, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
On 06/01/16 21:21, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
The only purpose of having that information in the request is to quickly
get things that are immediately necessary - otherwise the full context
ca
Hi Tamas,
On 01/06/16 19:21, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM
On 06/01/16 21:21, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
>
On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>>> On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beul
Hi,
On 01/06/16 09:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 30.05.16 at 00:37, wrote:
+struct vm_event_regs_arm32 {
+uint32_t r0_usr;
+ui
>>> On 31.05.16 at 18:28, wrote:
> On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>>
>> >>> On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > On 30.05.16 at 00:37, wrote:
>> >>> +struct vm_event_regs_arm32 {
>> >>> +uint32_t r0_usr;
>> >>> +uin
On May 31, 2016 01:48, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
> >>> On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote:
> > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 30.05.16 at 00:37, wrote:
> >>> +struct vm_event_regs_arm32 {
> >>> +uint32_t r0_usr;
> >>> +uint32_t r1_usr;
> >>> +uint32_t r2_usr;
>
On May 31, 2016 01:54, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
> >>> On 30.05.16 at 22:37, wrote:
> > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall
wrote:
> >> On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich
wrote:
> > +struct vm_event_regs_arm64 {
> > +
>>> On 31.05.16 at 10:06, wrote:
> On 05/31/2016 10:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 30.05.16 at 22:37, wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> +struct vm
On 05/31/2016 10:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 30.05.16 at 22:37, wrote:
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> +struct vm_event_regs_arm64 {
>> +uint64_t
>>> On 30.05.16 at 22:37, wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
>> On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> +struct vm_event_regs_arm64 {
> +uint64_t x0;
> +uint64_t x1;
> +uint64_t x
>>> On 30.05.16 at 21:47, wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 30.05.16 at 00:37, wrote:
>>> +struct vm_event_regs_arm32 {
>>> +uint32_t r0_usr;
>>> +uint32_t r1_usr;
>>> +uint32_t r2_usr;
>>> +uint32_t r3_usr;
>>> +uint32_t r4_usr;
>>> +u
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
> On 30/05/2016 21:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Tamas,
>>>
>>> On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich w
On 30/05/2016 21:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Tamas,
On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
+struct vm_event_regs_arm64 {
+uint64_t x0;
+uint64_t x1;
+uint64_t x2;
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Razvan Cojocaru
wrote:
> On 05/30/16 23:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>> Well, as we discussed it in the previous revision, there is no
>> hard-set rule of what can and cannot be transmitted here. The only
>> thing to keep in mind is to not grow this struct to be too
On 05/30/16 23:37, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> Well, as we discussed it in the previous revision, there is no
> hard-set rule of what can and cannot be transmitted here. The only
> thing to keep in mind is to not grow this struct to be too large. The
> registers sent right now represent a "best guess"
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Tamas,
>
> On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
+struct vm_event_regs_arm64 {
+uint64_t x0;
+uint64_t x1;
+uint64_t x2;
+uint64_
Hi Tamas,
On 30/05/2016 20:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
+struct vm_event_regs_arm64 {
+uint64_t x0;
+uint64_t x1;
+uint64_t x2;
+uint64_t x3;
+uint64_t x4;
+uint64_t x5;
+uint64_t x6;
+uint64_t x7;
+uint64_t
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 30.05.16 at 00:37, wrote:
>> +struct vm_event_regs_arm32 {
>> +uint32_t r0_usr;
>> +uint32_t r1_usr;
>> +uint32_t r2_usr;
>> +uint32_t r3_usr;
>> +uint32_t r4_usr;
>> +uint32_t r5_usr;
>> +uint32_t r6_usr;
>>
>>> On 30.05.16 at 00:37, wrote:
> +struct vm_event_regs_arm32 {
> +uint32_t r0_usr;
> +uint32_t r1_usr;
> +uint32_t r2_usr;
> +uint32_t r3_usr;
> +uint32_t r4_usr;
> +uint32_t r5_usr;
> +uint32_t r6_usr;
> +uint32_t r7_usr;
> +uint32_t r8_usr;
> +uint32_t r
On 05/30/2016 01:37 AM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> Add support for getting/setting registers through vm_event on ARM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tamas K Lengyel
> ---
> Cc: Stefano Stabellini
> Cc: Julien Grall
> Cc: Razvan Cojocaru
>
> v4: Use psr mode to determine whether to full 32-bit or 64-bit str
Add support for getting/setting registers through vm_event on ARM.
Signed-off-by: Tamas K Lengyel
---
Cc: Stefano Stabellini
Cc: Julien Grall
Cc: Razvan Cojocaru
v4: Use psr mode to determine whether to full 32-bit or 64-bit structs
---
xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 +
xen/arch/arm/vm
28 matches
Mail list logo
