This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVMLOADER][DISCUSS] 8 way default rombios

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Wang, Winston L" <winston.l.wang@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVMLOADER][DISCUSS] 8 way default rombios
From: "Woller, Thomas" <thomas.woller@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 07:30:04 -0500
Cc: Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 05:30:51 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcaKECAMaA5uwbQ6T6SWNB7AZGXsUwAHH+kg
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][HVMLOADER][DISCUSS] 8 way default rombios
Thank you winston! 
we were performing the same experiments yesterday after our regression
*finally* found the same problem... a bit late though, after the patch
was applied to both trees.  

> The best way would be to do the same as the for our ACPI 
> tables -- dynamically generate the CPU entries (LAPIC entries 
> in case of ACPI
> tables) when we know how many VCPUs the guest has been allocated.
> This would get rid of multiple statically-compiled rombios 
> images, each of which only differs in CPU info in the MPS 
> table. It could even be hacked up without modifying rombios 
> image -- e.g., hvmloader could scan for and then modify the 
> MPS table to insert secondary-processor entries. It wouldn't 
> be very hard to do.
> In any case, I'll revert the earlier patch. Using a MPS table 
> that advertises 8 processors when a guest actually has fewer 
> doesn't seem a very wise idea.
Agreed. Reversion is probably best here for both unstable and
3.0-testing. I'll take a gander at adding the tables dynamically in
hvmloader, and see if I can get a preliminary patch out in a couple of
days - need to test quite a few configurations.

Xen-devel mailing list