7 messages in com.xensource.lists.xen-ia64-develRe: [Xen-ia64-devel] RFC: adding a do...
FromSent OnAttachments
Tristan Gingold23 May 2006 07:25 
Tian, Kevin23 May 2006 23:50 
Isaku Yamahata24 May 2006 19:03 
Tristan Gingold30 May 2006 00:42 
Tristan Gingold30 May 2006 00:56 
Tian, Kevin30 May 2006 07:41 
Tristan Gingold30 May 2006 08:06 
Subject:Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] RFC: adding a dom0_firmware_setup hypercall
From:Tristan Gingold (Tris@bull.net)
Date:05/30/2006 12:56:19 AM
List:com.xensource.lists.xen-ia64-devel

Le Mercredi 24 Mai 2006 08:50, Tian, Kevin a écrit :

From: Tristan Gingold

Sent: 2006年5月23日 22:25 Hi,

this a just for review and comments. The purpose is not to use DOM0_SETVPUCONTEXT to initialiaze a domain. This is the first step for save&restore.

Since it's a RFC, it's better if, you could give more detail description about why you need this change and what benefit people can achieve from. For example: - Why do you like to kill DOM0_SETVPUCONTEXT, which has common concept and has been used for ia64 now?

I don't want to kill it.

- Why is it the first step toward save&restore?

Currently, SETVPUCONTEXT has side effects: initializing the domain. SETVPUCONTEXT has to be used during restore to set all VCPUs. If it also initialize the domain (ie, set the firmware), bad things may happen.

- ...

...

Based on those information, people can better understand your proposal and thus give appropriate comments.

BTW, why can't those new fields (or whole firmware setup structure) be put in vcpu_guest_context without adding a new dom0_op?

For the above reason. I think vcpu_guest_context should only modify the vcpu, not the domain.

[This patch also contains warning cleanup, it will be separated of course].

It's still better if you could remove hunks which only contains warning cleanup, and then make people further focusing the very content you like others to review. :-)

Sure.

Tristan.