Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-20 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 20.03.17 at 14:10, wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 04:40:49AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 16.03.17 at 18:54, wrote: >> > @@ -154,11 +155,11 @@ static void __init parse_dom0_nodes(const char *s) >> > } >> > custom_param("dom0_nodes",

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-20 Thread Wei Liu
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 04:40:49AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 16.03.17 at 18:54, wrote: > > @@ -154,11 +155,11 @@ static void __init parse_dom0_nodes(const char *s) > > } > > custom_param("dom0_nodes", parse_dom0_nodes); > > > > -static cpumask_t __initdata

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-20 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 16.03.17 at 18:54, wrote: > @@ -154,11 +155,11 @@ static void __init parse_dom0_nodes(const char *s) > } > custom_param("dom0_nodes", parse_dom0_nodes); > > -static cpumask_t __initdata dom0_cpus; > +cpumask_t __initdata dom0_cpus; I'd prefer if this variable

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-17 Thread Wei Liu
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:15:45AM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 16/03/17 17:54, Wei Liu wrote: > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/pv/dom0_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/pv/dom0_build.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 00..bb82c33a4c > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pv/dom0_build.c > > @@

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-17 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 16/03/17 17:54, Wei Liu wrote: > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/pv/dom0_build.c b/xen/arch/x86/pv/dom0_build.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00..bb82c33a4c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pv/dom0_build.c > @@ -0,0 +1,910 @@ >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-16 Thread Wei Liu
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:15:01PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 16/03/17 18:12, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:54:56PM +, Wei Liu wrote: > > [...] > >> +/* > >> + * PVH Fixme: XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel has been reused in PVH > >> with a > >> + *

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-16 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 16/03/17 18:12, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:54:56PM +, Wei Liu wrote: > [...] >> +/* >> + * PVH Fixme: XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel has been reused in PVH >> with a >> + * different meaning. > Crap, I've forgot to remove this PVH fixme! And

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-16 Thread Roger Pau Monné
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:54:56PM +, Wei Liu wrote: [...] > +/* > + * PVH Fixme: XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel has been reused in PVH with > a > + * different meaning. Crap, I've forgot to remove this PVH fixme! [...] > diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/dom0_build.h >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-16 Thread Wei Liu
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:12:08PM +, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:54:56PM +, Wei Liu wrote: > [...] > > +/* > > + * PVH Fixme: XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel has been reused in PVH > > with a > > + * different meaning. > > Crap, I've forgot to remove

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

2017-03-16 Thread Wei Liu
Long term we want to be able to disentangle PV and HVM code. Move the PV domain builder to a dedicated file. This in turn requires exposing a few functions and variables via a new header dom0_build.h. These functions and variables are now prefixed with "dom0_" if they weren't already so. No