>>> On 20.06.15 at 05:09, <boris.ostrov...@oracle.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
> @@ -141,6 +141,13 @@ static struct vcpu *__init setup_dom0_vcpu(struct domain
> *d,
> if ( !d->is_pinned && !dom0_affinity_relaxed )
> cpumask_copy(v->cpu_hard_affinity, &dom0_cpus);
> cpumask_copy(v->cpu_soft_affinity, &dom0_cpus);
> +
> + if ( is_pvh_vcpu(v) )
> + if ( hvm_set_mode(v, is_pv_32bit_domain(d) ? 4 : 8) )
This should be just one if().
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -2320,12 +2320,7 @@ int hvm_vcpu_initialise(struct vcpu *v)
> v->arch.hvm_vcpu.inject_trap.vector = -1;
>
> if ( is_pvh_domain(d) )
> - {
> - v->arch.hvm_vcpu.hcall_64bit = 1; /* PVH 32bitfixme. */
> - /* This is for hvm_long_mode_enabled(v). */
> - v->arch.hvm_vcpu.guest_efer = EFER_LMA | EFER_LME;
> return 0;
> - }
With this removed, is there any guarantee that hvm_set_mode()
will be called for each vCPU?
Anyway, while I'll apply the previous patch as a cleanup one, I'll
defer this and later ones until a decision between pursuing PVH
vs going the "HVMlite" route was made.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
