Enable selecting the mode in which the domain will be built and ran. This
includes:
- whether it will be either a 32/64 bit domain
- if it will be run as a PV or HVM domain
- and if it will require a device model (not applicable for dom0)
In the device tree, this will be represented as a bit map that will be carried
through into struct boot_domain.
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsmith@apertussolutions.com>
---
xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h | 6 ++++++
xen/arch/x86/setup.c | 3 ++-
3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
index 3a6b4fbc09a9..09e72d96a752 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
@@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
}
+ if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
+ {
+ if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
+ {
+ printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
+ name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ printk(" mode: ");
+ if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
+ if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
+ printk("HVM\n");
+ else
+ printk("PVH\n");
+ }
+ else
+ printk("PV\n");
+ }
}
fdt_for_each_subnode(node, fdt, dom_node)
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
index ffda1509a63f..50c33d183e07 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
@@ -18,6 +18,12 @@ struct boot_domain {
domid_t domid;
+ /* On | Off */
+#define BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT (1 << 0) /* PV | PVH/HVM */
+#define BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM (1 << 1) /* HVM | PVH */
+#define BUILD_MODE_LONG (1 << 2) /* 64 BIT | 32 BIT */
+ uint32_t mode;
+
struct boot_module *kernel;
struct boot_module *ramdisk;
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
index 317349b80ac6..dae25721994d 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
@@ -1006,7 +1006,8 @@ static struct domain *__init create_dom0(struct boot_info *bi)
struct boot_domain *bd = &bi->domains[0];
struct domain *d;
- if ( opt_dom0_pvh )
+ if ( opt_dom0_pvh ||
+ (bi->hyperlaunch_enabled && !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT)) )
{
dom0_cfg.flags |= (XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm |
((hvm_hap_supported() && !opt_dom0_shadow) ?
--
2.30.2On 23.11.2024 19:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
> @@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
> bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
> printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
> }
> + if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
> + {
> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
> + {
> + printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
> + name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + printk(" mode: ");
> + if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
> + if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
> + printk("HVM\n");
> + else
> + printk("PVH\n");
> + }
> + else
> + printk("PV\n");
Oh, and: What about BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM also being set here?
Jan
On 12/2/24 07:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 23.11.2024 19:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
>> @@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
>> bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
>> printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
>> }
>> + if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
>> + {
>> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
>> + {
>> + printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
>> + name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + printk(" mode: ");
>> + if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
>> + if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
>> + printk("HVM\n");
>> + else
>> + printk("PVH\n");
>> + }
>> + else
>> + printk("PV\n");
>
> Oh, and: What about BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM also being set here?
Are you asking in the sense that the PV domain is being flag as a device
model domain? Maybe I am missing something, but I am not aware of
anything specific that must be set for a PV domain to operate as device
model domain. If flask is in play, then there is a secure label
requirement but that is separate of a mode that the domain must be
running in. Please enlighten me if I am over looking something.
v/r,
dps
On 11.12.2024 18:48, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> On 12/2/24 07:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 23.11.2024 19:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
>>> @@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
>>> bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
>>> printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
>>> }
>>> + if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
>>> + {
>>> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
>>> + {
>>> + printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
>>> + name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + printk(" mode: ");
>>> + if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
>>> + if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
>>> + printk("HVM\n");
>>> + else
>>> + printk("PVH\n");
>>> + }
>>> + else
>>> + printk("PV\n");
>>
>> Oh, and: What about BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM also being set here?
>
> Are you asking in the sense that the PV domain is being flag as a device
> model domain? Maybe I am missing something, but I am not aware of
> anything specific that must be set for a PV domain to operate as device
> model domain. If flask is in play, then there is a secure label
> requirement but that is separate of a mode that the domain must be
> running in. Please enlighten me if I am over looking something.
Rephrasing my question: Is it legitimate for BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT to be
accompanied with BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM. If it is, what is the difference
between BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT|BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM and plain
BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT? If there's none, perhaps better to reject the flag
(retaining possible use for some future purpose)?
Jan
On 23.11.2024 19:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
> @@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
> bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
> printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
> }
> + if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
> + {
> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
> + {
> + printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
> + name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + printk(" mode: ");
> + if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
Nit: Brace placement.
> + if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
> + printk("HVM\n");
> + else
> + printk("PVH\n");
> + }
> + else
> + printk("PV\n");
> + }
> }
>
> fdt_for_each_subnode(node, fdt, dom_node)
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
> @@ -18,6 +18,12 @@ struct boot_domain {
>
> domid_t domid;
>
> + /* On | Off */
> +#define BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT (1 << 0) /* PV | PVH/HVM */
> +#define BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM (1 << 1) /* HVM | PVH */
> +#define BUILD_MODE_LONG (1 << 2) /* 64 BIT | 32 BIT */
This last one isn't used anywhere, is it?
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
> @@ -1006,7 +1006,8 @@ static struct domain *__init create_dom0(struct boot_info *bi)
> struct boot_domain *bd = &bi->domains[0];
> struct domain *d;
>
> - if ( opt_dom0_pvh )
> + if ( opt_dom0_pvh ||
> + (bi->hyperlaunch_enabled && !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT)) )
> {
> dom0_cfg.flags |= (XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm |
> ((hvm_hap_supported() && !opt_dom0_shadow) ?
What about BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM?
Jan
On 12/2/24 07:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 23.11.2024 19:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_builder/fdt.c
>> @@ -141,6 +141,25 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
>> bd->domid = (domid_t)val;
>> printk(" domid: %d\n", bd->domid);
>> }
>> + if ( match_fdt_property(fdt, prop, "mode" ) )
>> + {
>> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u32(prop, &bd->mode) != 0 )
>> + {
>> + printk(" failed processing mode for domain %s\n",
>> + name == NULL ? "unknown" : name);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + printk(" mode: ");
>> + if ( !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT) ) {
>
> Nit: Brace placement.
Ack.
>> + if ( bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM )
>> + printk("HVM\n");
>> + else
>> + printk("PVH\n");
>> + }
>> + else
>> + printk("PV\n");
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> fdt_for_each_subnode(node, fdt, dom_node)
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootdomain.h
>> @@ -18,6 +18,12 @@ struct boot_domain {
>>
>> domid_t domid;
>>
>> + /* On | Off */
>> +#define BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT (1 << 0) /* PV | PVH/HVM */
>> +#define BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM (1 << 1) /* HVM | PVH */
>> +#define BUILD_MODE_LONG (1 << 2) /* 64 BIT | 32 BIT */
>
> This last one isn't used anywhere, is it?
Hmm, I may have lost this when AMD asked for PVH to be done this cycle.
It should still be used to allow for 32bit PV dom0, will get this added in.
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>> @@ -1006,7 +1006,8 @@ static struct domain *__init create_dom0(struct boot_info *bi)
>> struct boot_domain *bd = &bi->domains[0];
>> struct domain *d;
>>
>> - if ( opt_dom0_pvh )
>> + if ( opt_dom0_pvh ||
>> + (bi->hyperlaunch_enabled && !(bd->mode & BUILD_MODE_PARAVIRT)) )
>> {
>> dom0_cfg.flags |= (XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm |
>> ((hvm_hap_supported() && !opt_dom0_shadow) ?
>
> What about BUILD_MODE_ENABLE_DM?
Good point, a goal for HL was to enable building and booting with
separate hwdom and ctldom.
v/r,
dps
On 2024-11-23 13:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote: > Enable selecting the mode in which the domain will be built and ran. This > includes: > > - whether it will be either a 32/64 bit domain > - if it will be run as a PV or HVM domain > - and if it will require a device model (not applicable for dom0) > > In the device tree, this will be represented as a bit map that will be carried > through into struct boot_domain. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsmith@apertussolutions.com> Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com> 32/64 is only applicable for PV. It might be worth mentioning that. Regards, Jason
On 11/25/24 18:52, Jason Andryuk wrote: > On 2024-11-23 13:20, Daniel P. Smith wrote: >> Enable selecting the mode in which the domain will be built and ran. This >> includes: >> >> - whether it will be either a 32/64 bit domain >> - if it will be run as a PV or HVM domain >> - and if it will require a device model (not applicable for dom0) >> >> In the device tree, this will be represented as a bit map that will be >> carried >> through into struct boot_domain. >> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsmith@apertussolutions.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com> Thanks! > 32/64 is only applicable for PV. It might be worth mentioning that. Ack. v/r, dps
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.