xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0
To: |
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0 |
From: |
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Sun, 21 Aug 2011 13:26:04 +0800 |
Accept-language: |
en-US |
Acceptlanguage: |
en-US |
Cc: |
"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>, "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Sat, 20 Aug 2011 22:27:20 -0700 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<4E4E9707020000780005206C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
References: |
<4E4D23370200007800051D2C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F15062EB8CC157@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E4E369F0200007800051F2A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F15062EB8CC533@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E4E49C40200007800051F7B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F15062EB8CC5AC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E4E9707020000780005206C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Thread-index: |
AcxegNUssRdk7/F7Rii2Es9Pa1fBewBQeEpA |
Thread-topic: |
[Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0 |
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 11:02 PM
> > >> Yet another idea - why don't we simply pass the buffer passed to
> > >> arch_acpi_set_pdc_bits() down to Xen, rather than fiddling with the
> > >> bits in Dom0? That would at once allow to not set ACPI_PDC_T_FFH
> > >> (which I don't think Xen really supports at present).
> > >>
> > >> Or really, depending on who controls what, the P, C, and T bits should
> > >> be set by either Dom0 or Xen (so e.g. let Dom0 do what it currently
> > >> does, and then let Xen override the bits it ought to control).
> > >
> > > _PDC is encoded in AML language, and requires an ACPI parser which
> > > is one thing we avoid in Xen. If Xen want to override those bits, then
> > > whole ACPI component needs move down to Xen too.
> >
> > No, I'm not saying the evaluation should be happening there. Below is
> > a draft hypervisor patch (only compile tested so far).
>
> Attached a patch that actually works (with a minimal Dom0 addition).
>
yes, this change looks more straightforward. :-)
Thanks
Kevin
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, (continued)
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Tian, Kevin
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Tian, Kevin
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Tian, Kevin
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0,
Tian, Kevin <=
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Jan Beulich
- RE: [Xen-devel] expose MWAIT to dom0, Tian, Kevin
|
|
|