PV blk backend: Make 32bit PV guests work on 64bit PV Dom0
PATCH 1/1 PV blk backend: Make 32bit PV guests work on 64bit PV Dom0
Hi,
Attached patch makes the PV block driver for 32bit PV guests working on 64bit PV Dom0.
In the io/blkif.h, the 'id' field of
struct blkif_request is 64bit, but on a LP32 system it's aligned on 32bits, while it'll be aligned to 64bits on a LP64 system. So on LP64 there'll be 4 bytes of padding between handle and id. The same is true for struct blkif_response: it's 11 bytes long, so will be aligned differently in the ring between a 32 and 64bit systems.
In order to fix this, attached patch introduces in the public headers, blkif_request/blkif_response, blkif_x86_32_request/blkif_x86_32_response and blkif_x86_64_request/blkif_x86_64_response.
NetBSD is doing so io/blkif.h in the public headers, while Linux does so in include/xen/blkif.h in the linux sources. But the result is the same ...
Successfully tested with the combinations:
64bit Dom0 32bit PAE PV guest
NetBSD Linux
Linux NetBSD
The combinations 64bit Dom0, 64bit PV DomU works with and without this patch.
Signature · 12 lines
AMD Saxony, Dresden, Germany Operating System Research Center Legal Information: AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG Sitz (Geschäftsanschrift): Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Deutschland Registergericht Dresden: HRA 4896 vertretungsberechtigter Komplementär: AMD Saxony LLC (Sitz Wilmington, Delaware, USA) Geschäftsführer der AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
xen/include/public/io/blkif.h +49 -0
@@ -91,6 +91,8 @@ struct blkif_request_segment {uint8_t first_sect, last_sect; }; +/* native-type requests/responses (always used in frontends ) */ +struct blkif_request {uint8_t operation;/* BLKIF_OP_??? */ uint8_t nr_segments;/* number of segments */
@@ -108,6 +110,44 @@ struct blkif_response { };typedef struct blkif_response blkif_response_t ; +/* i386 requests/responses */ +struct blkif_x86_32_request { +uint8_t operation;/* BLKIF_OP_??? */ +uint8_t nr_segments;/* number of segments */ +blkif_vdev_t handle;/* only for read/write requests */ +uint64_t id;/* private guest value, echoed in resp */ +blkif_sector_t sector_number;/* start sector idx on disk (r/w only) */ +struct blkif_request_segment seg[BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST ]; +}/* __packed */ ; +typedef struct blkif_x86_32_request blkif_x86_32_request_t ; + +struct blkif_x86_32_response { +uint64_t id;/* copied from request */ +uint8_t operation;/* copied from request */ +uint8_t _pad; +int16_t status;/* BLKIF_RSP_??? */ +}/* __packed */ ; +typedef struct blkif_x86_32_response blkif_x86_32_response_t ; + +/* amd64-type requests/responses (always used in frontends ) */ + +struct blkif_x86_64_request { +uint8_t operation;/* BLKIF_OP_??? */ +uint8_t nr_segments;/* number of segments */ +blkif_vdev_t handle;/* only for read/write requests */ +uint64_aligned_t id;/* private guest value, echoed in resp */ +blkif_sector_t sector_number;/* start sector idx on disk (r/w only) */ +struct blkif_request_segment seg[BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST ]; +}; +typedef struct blkif_x86_64_request blkif_x86_64_request_t ; + +struct blkif_x86_64_response { +uint64_aligned_t id;/* copied from request */ +uint8_t operation;/* copied from request */ +int16_t status;/* BLKIF_RSP_??? */ +}; +typedef struct blkif_x86_64_response blkif_x86_64_response_t ; +/* * STATUS RETURN CODES. */
@@ -123,6 +163,15 @@ typedef struct blkif_response blkif_resp*/ DEFINE_RING_TYPES(blkif, struct blkif_request, struct blkif_response); +DEFINE_RING_TYPES(blkif_x86_32, struct blkif_x86_32_request, struct blkif_x86_32_response); +DEFINE_RING_TYPES(blkif_x86_64, struct blkif_x86_64_request, struct blkif_x86_64_response); + +union blkif_back_ring_proto { +blkif_back_ring_t ring_n;/* native/common members */ +blkif_x86_32_back_ring_t ring_32; +blkif_x86_64_back_ring_t ring_64; +}; +typedef union blkif_back_ring_proto blkif_back_ring_proto_t ;#define VDISK_CDROM 0x1#define VDISK_REMOVABLE 0x2
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Just do the same as we do in Linux and put these defs in your NetBSD private header space.
-- Keir
Quoted 30 lines · Christoph Egger
Hi,
Attached patch makes the PV block driver for 32bit PV guests working on 64bit PV Dom0.
In the
io/blkif.h, the 'id' field of
structblkif_requestis 64bit, but on a LP32 system it's aligned on 32bits, while it'll be aligned to 64bits on a LP64 system. So on LP64 there'll be 4 bytes of padding between handle and id. The same is true for structblkif_response: it's 11 bytes long, so will be aligned differently in the ring between a 32 and 64bit systems.In order to fix this, attached patch introduces in the public headers, blkif_request/blkif_response, blkif_x86_32_request/blkif_x86_32_response and blkif_x86_64_request/blkif_x86_64_response.
NetBSD is doing soio/blkif.hin the public headers, while Linux does so ininclude/xen/blkif.hin the linux sources. But the result is the same ...Successfully tested with the combinations:
64bit Dom0 32bit PAE PV guest
NetBSD Linux
Linux NetBSDThe combinations 64bit Dom0, 64bit PV DomU works with and without this patch.
Signed-off-by Christoph Egger <[email protected]>
Quoted 2 lines · On Monday 28 July 2008 14:23:00 Keir Fraser wrote:
Just do the same as we do in Linux and put these defs in your NetBSD private header space.
That sounds like "All OS's have to go the Linux way" (which also includes Xen's Minios (stubdom)) instead of "fix it once and for all".
Christoph
Quoted 33 lines
-- Keir
Quoted 29 lines · Christoph Egger
Hi,
Attached patch makes the PV block driver for 32bit PV guests working on 64bit PV Dom0.
In the
io/blkif.h, the 'id' field of
structblkif_requestis 64bit, but on a LP32 system it's aligned on 32bits, while it'll be aligned to 64bits on a LP64 system. So on LP64 there'll be 4 bytes of padding between handle and id. The same is true for structblkif_response: it's 11 bytes long, so will be aligned differently in the ring between a 32 and 64bit systems.In order to fix this, attached patch introduces in the public headers, blkif_request/blkif_response, blkif_x86_32_request/blkif_x86_32_response and blkif_x86_64_request/blkif_x86_64_response.
NetBSD is doing soio/blkif.hin the public headers, while Linux does so ininclude/xen/blkif.hin the linux sources. But the result is the same ...Successfully tested with the combinations:
64bit Dom0 32bit PAE PV guest
NetBSD Linux
Linux NetBSDThe combinations 64bit Dom0, 64bit PV DomU works with and without this patch.
Signed-off-by Christoph Egger <[email protected]>
Signature · 12 lines
AMD Saxony, Dresden, Germany Operating System Research Center Legal Information: AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG Sitz (Geschäftsanschrift): Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Deutschland Registergericht Dresden: HRA 4896 vertretungsberechtigter Komplementär: AMD Saxony LLC (Sitz Wilmington, Delaware, USA) Geschäftsführer der AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
Quoted 6 lines · Christoph Egger
Quoted 2 lines · On Monday 28 July 2008 14:23:00 Keir Fraser wrote:
Just do the same as we do in Linux and put these defs in your NetBSD private header space.
That sounds like "All OS's have to go the Linux way" (which also includes Xen's Minios (stubdom)) instead of "fix it once and for all".
Quite the opposite. By doing it in your own header files you can specify the structure names and so on exactly how you would like them to be for the particular OS concerned.
-- Keir
Quoted 11 lines · On Monday 28 July 2008 14:36:49 Keir Fraser wrote:
Quoted 6 lines · Christoph Egger
Quoted 2 lines · On Monday 28 July 2008 14:23:00 Keir Fraser wrote:
Just do the same as we do in Linux and put these defs in your NetBSD private header space.
That sounds like "All OS's have to go the Linux way" (which also includes Xen's Minios (stubdom)) instead of "fix it once and for all".
Quite the opposite. By doing it in your own header files you can specify the structure names and so on exactly how you would like them to be for the particular OS concerned.
I'm concerned about having/keeping the API/ABI the same between all OS's and not about their implementation.
Christoph
Signature · 12 lines
AMD Saxony, Dresden, Germany Operating System Research Center Legal Information: AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG Sitz (Geschäftsanschrift): Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Deutschland Registergericht Dresden: HRA 4896 vertretungsberechtigter Komplementär: AMD Saxony LLC (Sitz Wilmington, Delaware, USA) Geschäftsführer der AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
Quoted 6 lines · Christoph Egger
Quoted 3 lines
Quite the opposite. By doing it in your own header files you can specify the structure names and so on exactly how you would like them to be for the particular OS concerned.
I'm concerned about having/keeping the API/ABI the same between all OS's and not about their implementation.
The interfaces (both the API exposed by public/ headers; and the ABI they describe) won't change. At least not in a way that isn't backward compatible. Or we'd be breaking old OSes all the time!
-- Keir
Quoted 10 lines · Keir Fraser
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quite the opposite. By doing it in your own header files you can specify the structure names and so on exactly how you would like them to be for the particular OS concerned.
I'm concerned about having/keeping the API/ABI the same between all OS's and not about their implementation.
The interfaces (both the API exposed by public/ headers; and the ABI they describe) won't change. At least not in a way that isn't backward compatible. Or we'd be breaking old OSes all the time!
I might add: why would placing those extra struct definitions in the public headers make it any more or less likely that we'll break compatibility in future? That makes no sense to me.
-- Keir
Quoted 11 lines · On Monday 28 July 2008 15:00:35 Keir Fraser wrote:
Quoted 6 lines · Christoph Egger
Quoted 3 lines
Quite the opposite. By doing it in your own header files you can specify the structure names and so on exactly how you would like them to be for the particular OS concerned.
I'm concerned about having/keeping the API/ABI the same between all OS's and not about their implementation.
The interfaces (both the API exposed by public/ headers; and the ABI they describe) won't change. At least not in a way that isn't backward compatible. Or we'd be breaking old OSes all the time!
Haven't those got broken with the removal of non-PAE support? :)
Christoph
Signature · 12 lines
AMD Saxony, Dresden, Germany Operating System Research Center Legal Information: AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG Sitz (Geschäftsanschrift): Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Deutschland Registergericht Dresden: HRA 4896 vertretungsberechtigter Komplementär: AMD Saxony LLC (Sitz Wilmington, Delaware, USA) Geschäftsführer der AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy