Re: [XenPPC] Re: New domain builder in xen-unstable
Hollis Blanchard wrote: > I can't just ifdef PowerPC's xc_linux_build back in, because libelf > doesn't map page-by-page like the old ELF loader did. That means I need > to pre-map the memory, which starts dragging in xc_dom infrastructure. You don't need more xc_dom infrastructure, I've tried to make the libelf bits independant of the xc_dom stoff for exactly that reason. Have a look at the hvm loader (xc_hvm_build.c). It uses libelf too, it has a loadelfimage() which maps the memory, calls elf_load_binary, unmaps again. You could do that too. Oh, and an example of page-by-page loading using libelf is in xen/arch/ia64/xen/domain.c. > What is the difference between dom->shadow_enable and > xc_dom_feature_translated()? It's identical now I think. In the early days (before split-off elf handling code to libelf) I've tried to use the new domain builder for hvm too, the logic whevener pfn->mfn translation is needed was a bit more complex than just looking up shadow_enabled. HTH, Gerd -- Gerd Hoffmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Re: New domain builder in xen-unstable
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 08:27 +, Keir Fraser wrote: > > > The new domain builder infrastructure is not flexible enough for > > PowerPC, so we're sticking with our own xc_linux_build(). It sounded > > before like that would be possible, so I assume a20ec270998b was > just an > > oversight? > > Hmm yes. You can #ifdef in the Python wrapper for now. But I'm > surprised that you can't move to the new domain builder at all -- it > has hooks for arch-dependent code to be inserted already, and we could > add more if there's a need. It's pretty complex, which you may not realize since Gerd did the x86 work for you. FYI, I've been working on this for three days, and when I'm done I will only have un-broken PowerPC. Dubious use of time IMHO. I can't just ifdef PowerPC's xc_linux_build back in, because libelf doesn't map page-by-page like the old ELF loader did. That means I need to pre-map the memory, which starts dragging in xc_dom infrastructure. I'm tempted to copy-paste-and-hack that infrastructure, but I'm trying to be a good person and fit into the common code (avoiding ifdefs) wherever possible. Here's my current confusion: where are these ELF features described? Since PowerPC domU communicate only via GPFNs, do I need to set the "auto-translated" feature? What is the difference between dom->shadow_enable and xc_dom_feature_translated()? -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Re: New domain builder in xen-unstable
On Tuesday, 06 March 2007 at 14:56, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 17:08 +, Keir Fraser wrote: > > xc_linux_build() is still provided in the 'new world' and is still > > used by xend. For ia64/x86 it is now a thin wrapper around Gerd's new > > domain-building infrastructure. For ppc you can continue to have your > > very own version under libxc/powerpc if you want to, and not use > > Gerd's new domain-building infrastructure. But the elf code that you > > rely on is going away, so you need to move to using libelf, which I'm > > sure Gerd can give you some pointers about. > > Hi Keir, it turns out I was confused about libxc, and we were depending > on the just-removed ELF loader. I'm fixing that now; please give me a > heads-up on the 3.0.5 release so I'm not caught out. > > Aside from that, it seems that xc_linux_build() is actually not called > by anybody any longer. It looks like changeset a20ec270998b (from > Brendan) removed the call from xc.c, replacing it with a call to the > "new style" domain builder via xc_dom_linux_build(). > > The new domain builder infrastructure is not flexible enough for > PowerPC, so we're sticking with our own xc_linux_build(). It sounded > before like that would be possible, so I assume a20ec270998b was just an > oversight? I have to admit, I haven't really looked at how other architectures are overriding the domain building stuff. Would it be possible to override xc_dom_linux_build to grab the couple of extra parameters you need (cmdline, features) from dom and pass them to your existing xc_linux_build? Then you can pass back elfnotes to python at your convenience, if/when it makes sense. ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Re: New domain builder in xen-unstable
On 6/3/07 20:56, "Hollis Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Keir, it turns out I was confused about libxc, and we were depending > on the just-removed ELF loader. I'm fixing that now; please give me a > heads-up on the 3.0.5 release so I'm not caught out. You have a couple of weeks at least. > Aside from that, it seems that xc_linux_build() is actually not called > by anybody any longer. It looks like changeset a20ec270998b (from > Brendan) removed the call from xc.c, replacing it with a call to the > "new style" domain builder via xc_dom_linux_build(). > > The new domain builder infrastructure is not flexible enough for > PowerPC, so we're sticking with our own xc_linux_build(). It sounded > before like that would be possible, so I assume a20ec270998b was just an > oversight? Hmm yes. You can #ifdef in the Python wrapper for now. But I'm surprised that you can't move to the new domain builder at all -- it has hooks for arch-dependent code to be inserted already, and we could add more if there's a need. -- Keir ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Re: New domain builder in xen-unstable
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 17:08 +, Keir Fraser wrote: > xc_linux_build() is still provided in the 'new world' and is still > used by xend. For ia64/x86 it is now a thin wrapper around Gerd's new > domain-building infrastructure. For ppc you can continue to have your > very own version under libxc/powerpc if you want to, and not use > Gerd's new domain-building infrastructure. But the elf code that you > rely on is going away, so you need to move to using libelf, which I'm > sure Gerd can give you some pointers about. Hi Keir, it turns out I was confused about libxc, and we were depending on the just-removed ELF loader. I'm fixing that now; please give me a heads-up on the 3.0.5 release so I'm not caught out. Aside from that, it seems that xc_linux_build() is actually not called by anybody any longer. It looks like changeset a20ec270998b (from Brendan) removed the call from xc.c, replacing it with a call to the "new style" domain builder via xc_dom_linux_build(). The new domain builder infrastructure is not flexible enough for PowerPC, so we're sticking with our own xc_linux_build(). It sounded before like that would be possible, so I assume a20ec270998b was just an oversight? -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
