On Tuesday 02 March 2010 09:02:40 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 03/01/2010 01:38 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > The PV extension of HVM(once known as Hybrid) is started from real mode
> > like HVM guest, but also with a component based PV feature selection(e.g.
> > PV halt, PV timer, event channel, then PV drivers). So guest can takes
> > the advantages of both H/W virtualization and Para-Virtualization.
> >
> > This patch introduced the PV extension of HVM guest initialization.
> >
> > Guest would detect the capability using CPUID 0x40000002.edx, then call
> > HVMOP_enable_pv hypercall to enable pv support in hypervisor.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang<sheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Yaozu (Eddie) Dong<eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/xen/cpuid.h | 5 ++
> > arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c | 115
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/x86/xen/irq.c |
> > 21 +++++++
> > arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S | 6 ++
> > arch/x86/xen/xen-ops.h | 1 +
> > include/xen/interface/hvm/hvm_op.h | 7 ++
> > include/xen/xen.h | 9 +++
> > 7 files changed, 164 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/cpuid.h
> > b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/cpuid.h index 8787f03..a93c851 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/cpuid.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/cpuid.h
> > @@ -65,4 +65,9 @@
> > #define _XEN_CPUID_FEAT1_MMU_PT_UPDATE_PRESERVE_AD 0
> > #define XEN_CPUID_FEAT1_MMU_PT_UPDATE_PRESERVE_AD (1u<<0)
> >
> > +#define _XEN_CPUID_FEAT2_HVM_PV 0
> > +#define XEN_CPUID_FEAT2_HVM_PV (1u<<0)
> > +#define _XEN_CPUID_FEAT2_HVM_PV_EVTCHN 1
> > +#define XEN_CPUID_FEAT2_HVM_PV_EVTCHN (1u<<1)
> > +
> > #endif /* __XEN_PUBLIC_ARCH_X86_CPUID_H__ */
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
> > index 36daccb..fdb9664 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
> > @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
> > #include<xen/interface/version.h>
> > #include<xen/interface/physdev.h>
> > #include<xen/interface/vcpu.h>
> > +#include<xen/interface/memory.h>
> > +#include<xen/interface/hvm/hvm_op.h>
> > #include<xen/features.h>
> > #include<xen/page.h>
> > #include<xen/hvc-console.h>
> > @@ -43,6 +45,7 @@
> > #include<asm/page.h>
> > #include<asm/xen/hypercall.h>
> > #include<asm/xen/hypervisor.h>
> > +#include<asm/xen/cpuid.h>
> > #include<asm/fixmap.h>
> > #include<asm/processor.h>
> > #include<asm/proto.h>
> > @@ -1198,3 +1201,115 @@ asmlinkage void __init xen_start_kernel(void)
> > x86_64_start_reservations((char *)__pa_symbol(&boot_params));
> > #endif
> > }
> > +
> > +static void __init xen_hvm_pv_banner(void)
> > +{
> > + unsigned version = HYPERVISOR_xen_version(XENVER_version, NULL);
> > + struct xen_extraversion extra;
> > + HYPERVISOR_xen_version(XENVER_extraversion,&extra);
> > +
> > + printk(KERN_INFO "Booting PV featured HVM kernel on %s\n",
> > + pv_info.name);
> > + printk(KERN_INFO "Xen version: %d.%d%s\n",
> > + version>> 16, version& 0xffff, extra.extraversion);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int xen_para_available(void)
> > +{
> > + uint32_t eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> > + cpuid(XEN_CPUID_LEAF(0),&eax,&ebx,&ecx,&edx);
> > +
> > + if (ebx == XEN_CPUID_SIGNATURE_EBX&&
> > + ecx == XEN_CPUID_SIGNATURE_ECX&&
> > + edx == XEN_CPUID_SIGNATURE_EDX&&
> > + ((eax - XEN_CPUID_LEAF(0))>= 2))
> > + return 1;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +u32 xen_hvm_pv_status;
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(xen_hvm_pv_status);
> > +
> > +static int enable_hvm_pv(u64 flags)
> > +{
> > + struct xen_hvm_pv_type a;
> > +
> > + a.domid = DOMID_SELF;
> > + a.flags = flags;
> > + return HYPERVISOR_hvm_op(HVMOP_enable_pv,&a);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int init_hvm_pv_info(void)
> > +{
> > + uint32_t ecx, edx, pages, msr;
> > + u64 pfn;
> > +
> > + if (!xen_para_available())
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + cpuid(XEN_CPUID_LEAF(2),&pages,&msr,&ecx,&edx);
> > +
> > + /* Check if hvm_pv mode is supported */
> > + if (!(edx& XEN_CPUID_FEAT2_HVM_PV))
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + xen_hvm_pv_status = XEN_HVM_PV_ENABLED;
>
> Why use this? Why not just set the domain type to HVM, and leave the
> "status" field as a bitset of available paravirtualizations?
A annoy thing in pv drivers is that it would test if the domain type is _NOT_
XEN_NATIVE. So set the domain to XEN_HVM_DOMAIN would result in PV driver
initialization then probably panic. Maybe we can do something to PV drivers,
as patch 6 and a part of patch 7.
>
> > +
> > + /* We only support 1 page of hypercall for now */
> > + if (pages != 1)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + pfn = __pa(hypercall_page);
> > + wrmsrl(msr, pfn);
> > +
> > + xen_setup_features();
> > +
> > + x86_init.oem.banner = xen_hvm_pv_banner;
> > + pv_info = xen_info;
> > + pv_info.kernel_rpl = 0;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +extern struct shared_info shared_info_page;
> > +
> > +static void __init init_shared_info(void)
> > +{
> > + struct xen_add_to_physmap xatp;
> > +
> > + xatp.domid = DOMID_SELF;
> > + xatp.idx = 0;
> > + xatp.space = XENMAPSPACE_shared_info;
> > + xatp.gpfn = __pa(&shared_info_page)>> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + if (HYPERVISOR_memory_op(XENMEM_add_to_physmap,&xatp))
> > + BUG();
> > +
> > + HYPERVISOR_shared_info = (struct shared_info *)&shared_info_page;
> > +
> > + /* Don't do the full vcpu_info placement stuff until we have a
> > + possible map and a non-dummy shared_info. */
>
> Is this comment meaningful here? This is the real shared info at this
> point, no? Are you going to support vcpu_info placement?
Would discard this..
> > + per_cpu(xen_vcpu, 0) =&HYPERVISOR_shared_info->vcpu_info[0];
> > +}
> > +
> > +void __init xen_guest_init(void)
> > +{
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > + return;
> > +#else
> > + int r;
> > +
> > + /* Ensure the we won't confused with PV */
> > + if (xen_domain_type == XEN_PV_DOMAIN)
> > + return;
>
> Aren't you specifically testing for xen_domain_type == NATIVE here? If
> its anything else, then it means we're either PV, or have become an HVM
> domain some other way (like probing for the Xen platform PCI device).
Yes, that's better.
> > +
> > + r = init_hvm_pv_info();
> > + if (r< 0)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + init_shared_info();
> > +
> > + xen_hvm_pv_init_irq_ops();
> > +#endif
> > +}
>
> Can you split all this off into a new file. It doesn't seem to have any
> dependencies on the rest of enlighten.c, and I've been trying to
> disaggregate it anyway.
Part of pv_ops are overlapped. I would try if a new file would bring much
duplicate.
> > +
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/irq.c b/arch/x86/xen/irq.c
> > index 9d30105..fadaa97 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/xen/irq.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/irq.c
> > @@ -131,3 +131,24 @@ void __init xen_init_irq_ops()
> > pv_irq_ops = xen_irq_ops;
> > x86_init.irqs.intr_init = xen_init_IRQ;
> > }
> > +
> > +static void xen_hvm_pv_safe_halt(void)
> > +{
> > + /* Do local_irq_enable() explicitly in hvm_pv guest */
> > + local_irq_enable();
> > + xen_safe_halt();
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void xen_hvm_pv_halt(void)
> > +{
> > + if (irqs_disabled())
> > + HYPERVISOR_vcpu_op(VCPUOP_down, smp_processor_id(), NULL);
> > + else
> > + xen_hvm_pv_safe_halt();
> > +}
> > +
> > +void __init xen_hvm_pv_init_irq_ops(void)
> > +{
> > + pv_irq_ops.safe_halt = xen_hvm_pv_safe_halt;
> > + pv_irq_ops.halt = xen_hvm_pv_halt;
> > +}
>
> It would be better to make this patch purely common infrastructure, and
> make specific features (like hvm+pv halt) separate patches (one per patch).
OK. (In fact I merged them in second edition...)
>
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S b/arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S
> > index 1a5ff24..26041ce 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S
> > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/xen-head.S
> > @@ -33,6 +33,12 @@ ENTRY(hypercall_page)
> > .skip PAGE_SIZE_asm
> > .popsection
> >
> > +.pushsection .data
> > + .align PAGE_SIZE_asm
> > +ENTRY(shared_info_page)
> > + .skip PAGE_SIZE_asm
> > +.popsection
>
> Why does this need to be defined in asm? Can't it be either allocated
> or defined in C?
I think we need a aligned page, as hypercall page.
>
> > +
> > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_OS, .asciz "linux")
> > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_GUEST_VERSION, .asciz "2.6")
> > ELFNOTE(Xen, XEN_ELFNOTE_XEN_VERSION, .asciz "xen-3.0")
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/xen-ops.h b/arch/x86/xen/xen-ops.h
> > index f9153a3..cc00760 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/xen/xen-ops.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/xen-ops.h
> > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ void xen_vcpu_restore(void);
> > void __init xen_build_dynamic_phys_to_machine(void);
> >
> > void xen_init_irq_ops(void);
> > +void xen_hvm_pv_init_irq_ops(void);
> > void xen_setup_timer(int cpu);
> > void xen_setup_runstate_info(int cpu);
> > void xen_teardown_timer(int cpu);
> > diff --git a/include/xen/interface/hvm/hvm_op.h
> > b/include/xen/interface/hvm/hvm_op.h index 7c74ba4..0ce8a26 100644
> > --- a/include/xen/interface/hvm/hvm_op.h
> > +++ b/include/xen/interface/hvm/hvm_op.h
> > @@ -69,4 +69,11 @@
> > DEFINE_GUEST_HANDLE_STRUCT(xen_hvm_set_pci_link_route); /* Flushes all
> > VCPU TLBs: @arg must be NULL. */
> > #define HVMOP_flush_tlbs 5
> >
> > +#define HVMOP_enable_pv 9
> > +struct xen_hvm_pv_type {
> > + domid_t domid;
> > + uint32_t flags;
> > +#define HVM_PV_EVTCHN (1ull<<1)
> > +};
> > +
> > #endif /* __XEN_PUBLIC_HVM_HVM_OP_H__ */
> > diff --git a/include/xen/xen.h b/include/xen/xen.h
> > index a164024..9bb92e5 100644
> > --- a/include/xen/xen.h
> > +++ b/include/xen/xen.h
> > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ enum xen_domain_type {
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_XEN
> > extern enum xen_domain_type xen_domain_type;
> > +extern void xen_guest_init(void);
> > #else
> > #define xen_domain_type XEN_NATIVE
> > #endif
> > @@ -19,6 +20,14 @@ extern enum xen_domain_type xen_domain_type;
> > #define xen_hvm_domain() (xen_domain()&& \
> > xen_domain_type == XEN_HVM_DOMAIN)
> >
> > +#define XEN_HVM_PV_ENABLED (1u<< 0)
>
> Why have this? We already have xen_domain_type which will either be
> XEN_NATIVE (ie, either real native, or on some fully emulated
> environment we have no specific optimisations for), or XEN_HVM_DOMAIN
> (we know we're running under Xen as an HVM domain).
Something may need to change in pv driver, as I said above.
>
> > +#define XEN_HVM_PV_EVTCHN_ENABLED (1u<< 1)
> > +extern u32 xen_hvm_pv_status;
>
> I think "status" is a misnomer here. Isn't it specifically a set of PV
> features which are active?
Could you give a suggestion of the name? I am not a native English speaker...
>
> > +
> > +#define xen_hvm_pv_enabled() (xen_hvm_pv_status& XEN_HVM_PV_ENABLED)
> > +#define xen_hvm_pv_evtchn_enabled() (xen_hvm_pv_enabled()&& \
> > + (xen_hvm_pv_status& XEN_HVM_PV_EVTCHN_ENABLED))
>
> Testing for xen_hvm_pv_enabled() should be redundant; surely the
> status/feature flag won't be set unless the environment supports the
> feature, and if it does it doesn't really matter what the domain type is.
Sure
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
> > +
> > #ifdef CONFIG_XEN_DOM0
> > #include<xen/interface/xen.h>
> > #include<asm/xen/hypervisor.h>
>
> J
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home