On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/10/2018 00:37, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > reserved-memory regions should be mapped as normal memory. > > This is already the case with p2m_mmio_direct_c. The hardware domain should > have full control on the resulting attributes via its stage-1 mappings. So > what's wrong with that p2m type?
Shared mappings are prevented for any types other than p2m_ram_rw, see the p2m_is_ram checks in the implementation of XENMAPSPACE_gmfn_share. The alternative is to remove or extend the p2m_is_ram check at xen/arch/arm/mm.c:1283 > > At the > > moment, they get remapped as device memory because Xen doesn't know > > better. Add an explicit check for it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefa...@xilinx.com> > > --- > > xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c > > index f552154..c7df4cf 100644 > > --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c > > @@ -1307,6 +1307,13 @@ static int __init handle_node(struct domain *d, > > struct kernel_info *kinfo, > > "WARNING: Path %s is reserved, skip the node as we may > > re-use the path.\n", > > path); > > + /* > > + * reserved-memory ranges should be mapped as normal memory in the > > + * p2m. > > + */ > > + if ( !strcmp(dt_node_name(node), "reserved-memory") ) > > + p2mt = p2m_ram_rw; > > + > > res = handle_device(d, node, p2mt); > > if ( res) > > return res; > > > > -- > Julien Grall > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
