Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 05:35:36PM +0800, Xu, Anthony wrote:
>> The new one,
>>
>>
>>>> - if (phy_pte.ma != VA_MATTR_NATPAGE)
>>>> + /* if a device is assigned to a domain through VTD, the MMIO
>>>> for this + * device needs to retain to UC attribute + */
>>>> + if (phy_pte.ma == VA_MATTR_WC)
>>>> phy_pte.ma = VA_MATTR_WB;
>>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't this break the intention of the c/s 15134:466f71b1e831?a
>>> To be honest, I'm not sure. Kyouya or Akio, do you have any
>>> comments?
>>>
>> This section is not included, need kyouya or akio confirmation.
>>
>> Patches about mm.c is not inculded,
>> I'll send out a separate patch.
>
> Sounds good. the stuff in mm.c seems very tough.
> However the following patch still touches mm.c.
> Did you forget to remove it accidently?
I didn't remove all mm.c small patches,
I just removed the difficult part, which is related to atomic operation
Please, check in this patch first, I had tested it by booting linux guest.
>
> I had given it consideration a bit.
> I suppose the lockless implementation is possible.
> In fact tlb insert case is handled by retry using the p2m entry
> as change indicator. See ia64_do_page_fault(), vcpu_itc_i() and
> vcpu_itc_d().
> iommu case could be handled similary.
I didn't oppose lockless, acctually I use lockless in vhpt and vtlb code.
There are some redundant codes inside mm.c,
It's better to figure a way to merge it.
Thank,
Anthony
>
>
>> diff -r 02c8733e2d91 xen/arch/ia64/vmx/viosapic.c
>> --- a/xen/arch/ia64/vmx/viosapic.c Wed Oct 22 17:20:15 2008 +0900
>> +++ b/xen/arch/ia64/vmx/viosapic.c Wed Oct 22 17:08:32 2008 +0800
>> @@ -121,6 +121,13 @@ redir_num, vector);
>> return;
>> }
>> + if ( iommu_enabled )
>> + {
>> + spin_unlock(&viosapic->lock);
>> + hvm_dpci_eoi(current->domain, redir_num,
>> &viosapic->redirtbl[redir_num]); + spin_lock(&viosapic->lock);
>> + }
>> +
>> service_iosapic(viosapic);
>> spin_unlock(&viosapic->lock);
>> }
>
> viosapic->isr and irr must handled atomically.
> So unlocking and locking again breaks the requirement.
> (I haven't looked the viosapic code very closely, though.
> So I may be wrong.)
>
>
>> diff -r 02c8733e2d91 xen/arch/ia64/xen/mm.c
>> --- a/xen/arch/ia64/xen/mm.c Wed Oct 22 17:20:15 2008 +0900
>> +++ b/xen/arch/ia64/xen/mm.c Wed Oct 22 17:08:32 2008 +0800 @@
>> -1427,6 +1427,8 @@ if (mfn == INVALID_MFN) {
>> // clear pte
>> old_pte = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, mpaddr, pte);
>> + if(!pte_mem(old_pte))
>> + return;
>> mfn = pte_pfn(old_pte);
>> } else {
>> unsigned long old_arflags;
>> @@ -1463,6 +1465,13 @@
>> perfc_incr(zap_domain_page_one);
>> if(!mfn_valid(mfn))
>> return;
>> +
>> + {
>> + int i, j;
>> + j = 1 << (PAGE_SHIFT-PAGE_SHIFT_4K);
>> + for(i = 0 ; i < j; i++)
>> + iommu_unmap_page(d, (mpaddr>>PAGE_SHIFT)*j + i); + }
>>
>> page = mfn_to_page(mfn);
>> BUG_ON((page->count_info & PGC_count_mask) == 0); @@ -2844,10
>> +2853,16 @@ __guest_physmap_add_page(struct domain *d, unsigned
>> long gpfn, unsigned long mfn)
>> {
>> + int i, j;
>> +
>> set_gpfn_from_mfn(mfn, gpfn);
>> smp_mb();
>> assign_domain_page_replace(d, gpfn << PAGE_SHIFT, mfn,
>> ASSIGN_writable |
>> ASSIGN_pgc_allocated); + j = 1 << (PAGE_SHIFT-PAGE_SHIFT_4K);
>> + for(i = 0 ; i < j; i++)
>> + iommu_map_page(d, gpfn*j + i, mfn*j + i);
>> +
>> }
>>
>> int
>
> The same loop logic. Introducing a helper function would help?
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
Home