| Message ID | 1456382355-24614-5-git-send-email-fu.wei@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
25.02.2016 09:39, fu.wei@linaro.org ?????: > From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> > > delete: xen_linux, xen_initrd, xen_xsm > add: xen_module > > This update bases on > commit 0edd750e50698854068358ea53528100a9192902 > Author: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> > Date: Fri Jan 22 10:18:47 2016 +0100 > > xen_boot: Remove obsolete module type distinctions. > > Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> > --- > docs/grub.texi | 32 +++++++++----------------------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/docs/grub.texi b/docs/grub.texi > index 82f6fa4..0f99c50 100644 > --- a/docs/grub.texi > +++ b/docs/grub.texi > @@ -3861,9 +3861,7 @@ you forget a command, you can run the command @command{help} > * videoinfo:: List available video modes > @comment * xen_*:: Xen boot commands > * xen_hypervisor:: Load xen hypervisor binary > -* xen_linux:: Load dom0 kernel for xen hypervisor > -* xen_initrd:: Load dom0 initrd for dom0 kernel > -* xen_xsm:: Load xen security module for xen hypervisor > +* xen_module:: Load xen modules for xen hypervisor > @end menu > > > @@ -5141,30 +5139,18 @@ verbatim as the @dfn{kernel command-line}. Any other binaries must be > reloaded after using this command. > @end deffn > > -@node xen_linux > -@subsection xen_linux > +@node xen_module > +@subsection xen_module > > -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] > -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] > +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. > +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. > +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image > +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk > +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW > @end deffn > Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be loaded then? > -@node xen_initrd > -@subsection xen_initrd > - > -@deffn Command xen_initrd file > -Load a initrd image for dom0 kernel at the booting process of xen. > -@end deffn > - > -@node xen_xsm > -@subsection xen_xsm > - > -@deffn Command xen_xsm file > -Load a xen security module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > -See @uref{http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XSM} for more detail. > -@end deffn > - > - > @node Networking commands > @section The list of networking commands > >
On 2/25/16 12:39 AM, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote: > From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> > -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] > -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] > +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. > +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. > +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image > +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk > +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW Missing an 'N' at the end there. Probably worth mentioning that the ramdisk is optional as well.
Hi Andrei On 26 February 2016 at 01:34, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: > 25.02.2016 09:39, fu.wei@linaro.org ?????: >> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >> >> delete: xen_linux, xen_initrd, xen_xsm >> add: xen_module >> >> This update bases on >> commit 0edd750e50698854068358ea53528100a9192902 >> Author: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> >> Date: Fri Jan 22 10:18:47 2016 +0100 >> >> xen_boot: Remove obsolete module type distinctions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >> --- >> docs/grub.texi | 32 +++++++++----------------------- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/docs/grub.texi b/docs/grub.texi >> index 82f6fa4..0f99c50 100644 >> --- a/docs/grub.texi >> +++ b/docs/grub.texi >> @@ -3861,9 +3861,7 @@ you forget a command, you can run the command @command{help} >> * videoinfo:: List available video modes >> @comment * xen_*:: Xen boot commands >> * xen_hypervisor:: Load xen hypervisor binary >> -* xen_linux:: Load dom0 kernel for xen hypervisor >> -* xen_initrd:: Load dom0 initrd for dom0 kernel >> -* xen_xsm:: Load xen security module for xen hypervisor >> +* xen_module:: Load xen modules for xen hypervisor >> @end menu >> >> >> @@ -5141,30 +5139,18 @@ verbatim as the @dfn{kernel command-line}. Any other binaries must be >> reloaded after using this command. >> @end deffn >> >> -@node xen_linux >> -@subsection xen_linux >> +@node xen_module >> +@subsection xen_module >> >> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >> @end deffn >> > > Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module > type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is nothing to do with i386. so maybe we can say: ----------------------------- On ARM64, each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. The 1st module: dom0 kernel image The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk (optional) All subsequent modules: UNKNOWN On i386, the modules will be identified by Multiboot(2) protocol. ----------------------------- Is that better? please correct me if I miss something. > loaded then? > >> -@node xen_initrd >> -@subsection xen_initrd >> - >> -@deffn Command xen_initrd file >> -Load a initrd image for dom0 kernel at the booting process of xen. >> -@end deffn >> - >> -@node xen_xsm >> -@subsection xen_xsm >> - >> -@deffn Command xen_xsm file >> -Load a xen security module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >> -See @uref{http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XSM} for more detail. >> -@end deffn >> - >> - >> @node Networking commands >> @section The list of networking commands >> >> >
Hi Doug, On 26 February 2016 at 06:26, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote: > On 2/25/16 12:39 AM, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote: >> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW > > Missing an 'N' at the end there. Probably worth mentioning that the > ramdisk is optional as well. Thanks for correction, will fix it. > > -- > Doug Goldstein >
Hi Andrei On 26 February 2016 at 12:48, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Andrei > > On 26 February 2016 at 01:34, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >> 25.02.2016 09:39, fu.wei@linaro.org ?????: >>> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >>> >>> delete: xen_linux, xen_initrd, xen_xsm >>> add: xen_module >>> >>> This update bases on >>> commit 0edd750e50698854068358ea53528100a9192902 >>> Author: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> >>> Date: Fri Jan 22 10:18:47 2016 +0100 >>> >>> xen_boot: Remove obsolete module type distinctions. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> docs/grub.texi | 32 +++++++++----------------------- >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/docs/grub.texi b/docs/grub.texi >>> index 82f6fa4..0f99c50 100644 >>> --- a/docs/grub.texi >>> +++ b/docs/grub.texi >>> @@ -3861,9 +3861,7 @@ you forget a command, you can run the command @command{help} >>> * videoinfo:: List available video modes >>> @comment * xen_*:: Xen boot commands >>> * xen_hypervisor:: Load xen hypervisor binary >>> -* xen_linux:: Load dom0 kernel for xen hypervisor >>> -* xen_initrd:: Load dom0 initrd for dom0 kernel >>> -* xen_xsm:: Load xen security module for xen hypervisor >>> +* xen_module:: Load xen modules for xen hypervisor >>> @end menu >>> >>> >>> @@ -5141,30 +5139,18 @@ verbatim as the @dfn{kernel command-line}. Any other binaries must be >>> reloaded after using this command. >>> @end deffn >>> >>> -@node xen_linux >>> -@subsection xen_linux >>> +@node xen_module >>> +@subsection xen_module >>> >>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>> @end deffn >>> >> >> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be The problem is (on ARM64) if there is no initrd for dom0, then the second module loaded will be treated as ramdisk. Maybe we need to mention that? > > Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). > I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is > nothing to do with i386. > > so maybe we can say: > ----------------------------- > On ARM64, each module will be identified by the order in which the > modules are added. > The 1st module: dom0 kernel image > The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk (optional) > All subsequent modules: UNKNOWN > > On i386, the modules will be identified by Multiboot(2) protocol. > ----------------------------- > > Is that better? please correct me if I miss something. > >> loaded then? >> >>> -@node xen_initrd >>> -@subsection xen_initrd >>> - >>> -@deffn Command xen_initrd file >>> -Load a initrd image for dom0 kernel at the booting process of xen. >>> -@end deffn >>> - >>> -@node xen_xsm >>> -@subsection xen_xsm >>> - >>> -@deffn Command xen_xsm file >>> -Load a xen security module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>> -See @uref{http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XSM} for more detail. >>> -@end deffn >>> - >>> - >>> @node Networking commands >>> @section The list of networking commands >>> >>> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > > Fu Wei > Software Engineer > Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch > Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct) > Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile) > Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15, > One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District, > Shanghai,China 200021
?????????? ? iPhone > 26 ????. 2016 ?., ? 7:48, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> ???????(?): > > Hi Andrei > >> On 26 February 2016 at 01:34, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >> 25.02.2016 09:39, fu.wei@linaro.org ?????: >>> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >>> >>> delete: xen_linux, xen_initrd, xen_xsm >>> add: xen_module >>> >>> This update bases on >>> commit 0edd750e50698854068358ea53528100a9192902 >>> Author: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> >>> Date: Fri Jan 22 10:18:47 2016 +0100 >>> >>> xen_boot: Remove obsolete module type distinctions. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> docs/grub.texi | 32 +++++++++----------------------- >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/docs/grub.texi b/docs/grub.texi >>> index 82f6fa4..0f99c50 100644 >>> --- a/docs/grub.texi >>> +++ b/docs/grub.texi >>> @@ -3861,9 +3861,7 @@ you forget a command, you can run the command @command{help} >>> * videoinfo:: List available video modes >>> @comment * xen_*:: Xen boot commands >>> * xen_hypervisor:: Load xen hypervisor binary >>> -* xen_linux:: Load dom0 kernel for xen hypervisor >>> -* xen_initrd:: Load dom0 initrd for dom0 kernel >>> -* xen_xsm:: Load xen security module for xen hypervisor >>> +* xen_module:: Load xen modules for xen hypervisor >>> @end menu >>> >>> >>> @@ -5141,30 +5139,18 @@ verbatim as the @dfn{kernel command-line}. Any other binaries must be >>> reloaded after using this command. >>> @end deffn >>> >>> -@node xen_linux >>> -@subsection xen_linux >>> +@node xen_module >>> +@subsection xen_module >>> >>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>> @end deffn >> >> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be > > Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). > I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is > nothing to do with i386. > Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. > so maybe we can say: > ----------------------------- > On ARM64, each module will be identified by the order in which the > modules are added. > The 1st module: dom0 kernel image > The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk (optional) > All subsequent modules: UNKNOWN > > On i386, the modules will be identified by Multiboot(2) protocol. > ----------------------------- > > Is that better? please correct me if I miss something. > >> loaded then? >> >>> -@node xen_initrd >>> -@subsection xen_initrd >>> - >>> -@deffn Command xen_initrd file >>> -Load a initrd image for dom0 kernel at the booting process of xen. >>> -@end deffn >>> - >>> -@node xen_xsm >>> -@subsection xen_xsm >>> - >>> -@deffn Command xen_xsm file >>> -Load a xen security module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>> -See @uref{http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XSM} for more detail. >>> -@end deffn >>> - >>> - >>> @node Networking commands >>> @section The list of networking commands > > > > -- > Best regards, > > Fu Wei > Software Engineer > Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch > Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct) > Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile) > Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15, > One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District, > Shanghai,China 200021
Hi Andrei On 26 February 2016 at 13:24, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: > > > ?????????? ? iPhone > >> 26 ????. 2016 ?., ? 7:48, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> ???????(?): >> >> Hi Andrei >> >>> On 26 February 2016 at 01:34, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 25.02.2016 09:39, fu.wei@linaro.org ?????: >>>> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >>>> >>>> delete: xen_linux, xen_initrd, xen_xsm >>>> add: xen_module >>>> >>>> This update bases on >>>> commit 0edd750e50698854068358ea53528100a9192902 >>>> Author: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> >>>> Date: Fri Jan 22 10:18:47 2016 +0100 >>>> >>>> xen_boot: Remove obsolete module type distinctions. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> >>>> --- >>>> docs/grub.texi | 32 +++++++++----------------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/docs/grub.texi b/docs/grub.texi >>>> index 82f6fa4..0f99c50 100644 >>>> --- a/docs/grub.texi >>>> +++ b/docs/grub.texi >>>> @@ -3861,9 +3861,7 @@ you forget a command, you can run the command @command{help} >>>> * videoinfo:: List available video modes >>>> @comment * xen_*:: Xen boot commands >>>> * xen_hypervisor:: Load xen hypervisor binary >>>> -* xen_linux:: Load dom0 kernel for xen hypervisor >>>> -* xen_initrd:: Load dom0 initrd for dom0 kernel >>>> -* xen_xsm:: Load xen security module for xen hypervisor >>>> +* xen_module:: Load xen modules for xen hypervisor >>>> @end menu >>>> >>>> >>>> @@ -5141,30 +5139,18 @@ verbatim as the @dfn{kernel command-line}. Any other binaries must be >>>> reloaded after using this command. >>>> @end deffn >>>> >>>> -@node xen_linux >>>> -@subsection xen_linux >>>> +@node xen_module >>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>> >>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>> @end deffn >>> >>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >> >> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >> nothing to do with i386. >> > > Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux kernel, if you don't have initrd) Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not big problem on xsm. Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) Thanks! Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! > > >> so maybe we can say: >> ----------------------------- >> On ARM64, each module will be identified by the order in which the >> modules are added. >> The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >> The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk (optional) >> All subsequent modules: UNKNOWN >> >> On i386, the modules will be identified by Multiboot(2) protocol. >> ----------------------------- >> >> Is that better? please correct me if I miss something. >> >>> loaded then? >>> >>>> -@node xen_initrd >>>> -@subsection xen_initrd >>>> - >>>> -@deffn Command xen_initrd file >>>> -Load a initrd image for dom0 kernel at the booting process of xen. >>>> -@end deffn >>>> - >>>> -@node xen_xsm >>>> -@subsection xen_xsm >>>> - >>>> -@deffn Command xen_xsm file >>>> -Load a xen security module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>> -See @uref{http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XSM} for more detail. >>>> -@end deffn >>>> - >>>> - >>>> @node Networking commands >>>> @section The list of networking commands >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> >> Fu Wei >> Software Engineer >> Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch >> Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct) >> Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile) >> Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15, >> One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District, >> Shanghai,China 200021
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>>> >>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>>> @end deffn >>>> >>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >>> >>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >>> nothing to do with i386. >>> >> >> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. > > Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? > > I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux > kernel, if you don't have initrd) > > Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) > > I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not > big problem on xsm. > > Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) > > Thanks! > > Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! > Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done without initrd.
Hi Andrei, On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>>>> >>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>>>> @end deffn >>>>> >>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >>>> >>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >>>> nothing to do with i386. >>>> >>> >>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. >> >> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? >> >> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux >> kernel, if you don't have initrd) >> >> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) >> >> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not >> big problem on xsm. >> >> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) >> >> Thanks! >> >> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! >> > > Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory > order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be > initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more > than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done > without initrd. Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-)
On 26.02.2016 12:15, Fu Wei wrote: > Hi Andrei, > > On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>>>>> @end deffn >>>>>> >>>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >>>>> >>>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >>>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >>>>> nothing to do with i386. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. >>> >>> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? >>> >>> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux >>> kernel, if you don't have initrd) >>> >>> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) >>> >>> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not >>> big problem on xsm. >>> >>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! >>> >> >> Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory >> order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be >> initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more >> than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done >> without initrd. > > Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, > Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-) > Your patches look fine. Let's wait for Andrei's opinion but I'm leaning to commit them > >
On 26 February 2016 at 22:03, Vladimir '?-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> wrote: > On 26.02.2016 12:15, Fu Wei wrote: >> Hi Andrei, >> >> On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>>>>>> @end deffn >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>>>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >>>>>> >>>>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >>>>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >>>>>> nothing to do with i386. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. >>>> >>>> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? >>>> >>>> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux >>>> kernel, if you don't have initrd) >>>> >>>> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) >>>> >>>> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not >>>> big problem on xsm. >>>> >>>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! >>>> >>> >>> Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory >>> order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be >>> initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more >>> than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done >>> without initrd. >> >> Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, >> Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-) >> > Your patches look fine. Let's wait for Andrei's opinion but I'm leaning > to commit them Hi Vladimir, Great thanks for your review, :-) Hi Andrei, Do you have any suggestion for my v3 patchset? Please let me know if I can do anything to improve it. Thanks! :-) >> >> > >
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 07:15:52PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: > Hi Andrei, > > On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>>>> +@subsection xen_module > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] > >>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > >>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] > >>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > >>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. > >>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. > >>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image > >>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk > >>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW > >>>>>> @end deffn > >>>>> > >>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module > >>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be > >>>> > >>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). > >>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is > >>>> nothing to do with i386. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. > >> > >> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? > >> > >> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux > >> kernel, if you don't have initrd) > >> > >> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) > >> > >> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not > >> big problem on xsm. > >> > >> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! > >> > > > > Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory > > order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be > > initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more > > than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done > > without initrd. > > Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, > Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-) What if the initrd is catted to the kernel image (which you can do on x86)? And then the 1st module is your XSM? Is this .. order dependency written somewhere in a document? In the Xen code-base that is?
27.02.2016 23:33, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk ?????: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 07:15:52PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: >> Hi Andrei, >> >> On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>>>>>> @end deffn >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>>>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >>>>>> >>>>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >>>>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >>>>>> nothing to do with i386. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. >>>> >>>> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? >>>> >>>> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux >>>> kernel, if you don't have initrd) >>>> >>>> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) >>>> >>>> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not >>>> big problem on xsm. >>>> >>>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! >>>> >>> >>> Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory >>> order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be >>> initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more >>> than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done >>> without initrd. >> >> Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, >> Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-) > > What if the initrd is catted to the kernel image (which you can > do on x86)? And then the 1st module is your XSM? > On x86 Xen can detect microcode and xsm modules; the first unknown module after that is assumed to be initrd (dom0 kernel always must be the very first module provided). On arm there is no detection - module type is taken from FDT; if no module type is provided, the first unknown module is assumed to be kernel, the second - initrd. See also http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2016-02/msg00333.html > Is this .. order dependency written somewhere in a document? In the > Xen code-base that is? >
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 08:10:33AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > 27.02.2016 23:33, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk ?????: > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 07:15:52PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: > >> Hi Andrei, > >> > >> On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>>>>>> +@subsection xen_module > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] > >>>>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > >>>>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] > >>>>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. > >>>>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. > >>>>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. > >>>>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image > >>>>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk > >>>>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW > >>>>>>>> @end deffn > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module > >>>>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). > >>>>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is > >>>>>> nothing to do with i386. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. > >>>> > >>>> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? > >>>> > >>>> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux > >>>> kernel, if you don't have initrd) > >>>> > >>>> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) > >>>> > >>>> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not > >>>> big problem on xsm. > >>>> > >>>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) > >>>> > >>>> Thanks! > >>>> > >>>> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory > >>> order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be > >>> initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more > >>> than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done > >>> without initrd. > >> > >> Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, > >> Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-) > > > > What if the initrd is catted to the kernel image (which you can > > do on x86)? And then the 1st module is your XSM? > > > > On x86 Xen can detect microcode and xsm modules; the first unknown 'can'. If you use 'ucode=scan' on the Xen command line. Otherwise it has no clue. It actually would be just much nicer if Multiboot2 had some tag describing this and Xen (or any other OS) could just parse it like that. But that is just hand-waving, nice-to-do. > module after that is assumed to be initrd (dom0 kernel always must be > the very first module provided). That is true. > > On arm there is no detection - module type is taken from FDT; if no > module type is provided, the first unknown module is assumed to be > kernel, the second - initrd. > > See also http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2016-02/msg00333.html > > > Is this .. order dependency written somewhere in a document? In the > > Xen code-base that is? > > >
29.02.2016 17:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk ?????: > On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 08:10:33AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> 27.02.2016 23:33, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk ?????: >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 07:15:52PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote: >>>> Hi Andrei, >>>> >>>> On 26 February 2016 at 18:50, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> +@subsection xen_module >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] >>>>>>>>>> -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>>>>> +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] >>>>>>>>>> +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. >>>>>>>>>> The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. >>>>>>>>>> +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. >>>>>>>>>> +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image >>>>>>>>>> +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk >>>>>>>>>> +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW >>>>>>>>>> @end deffn >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hmm ... from previous discussion I gathered that Xen can detect module >>>>>>>>> type. What if there is no initrd for dom0? How can subsequent modules be >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now , Xen detect module type by the order. (at least on ARM64). >>>>>>>> I think i386 is using Multiboot(2) protocol, so maybe this order is >>>>>>>> nothing to do with i386. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then we have obvious problem with your XSM patch (http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?43420) - XSM may land as the first module. That's actually something to solve on Xen side I think. It's just that so far we had just kernel and initrd, so that was non issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> Oh, did you mean Wei Liu's patch? >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess XSM may land as the third module (or the module after linux >>>>>> kernel, if you don't have initrd) >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, agree. (That's actually something to solve on Xen side) >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess xen can get xsm from a special initrd. so for now there is not >>>>>> big problem on xsm. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please correct me if I misunderstand something. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> Back to this patch, is that OK for you, or any suggestion? Thanks ! >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, as this is dedicated Xen loader we should document this mandatory >>>>> order - first module must be kernel image, second module must be >>>>> initrd. I do not think we need to mention possibility to load more >>>>> than two modules until there is clear understanding how it can be done >>>>> without initrd. >>>> >>>> Great thanks for your review, I have updated and sent the v3 patchset, >>>> Hope I understood your suggestion correctly, Please check. :-) >>> >>> What if the initrd is catted to the kernel image (which you can >>> do on x86)? And then the 1st module is your XSM? >>> >> >> On x86 Xen can detect microcode and xsm modules; the first unknown > > 'can'. If you use 'ucode=scan' on the Xen command line. Otherwise it has > no clue. > You can also pass ucode=N where N is module number ... but it goes off-topic. The current state is - it turned out that on ARM Xen is capable to "detect" only two types of modules - dom0 kernel and dom0 initrd. The fact is that Xen on ARM has at least one more module type and it is not possible to reliably load it with current interface. > It actually would be just much nicer if Multiboot2 had some tag describing > this and Xen (or any other OS) could just parse it like that. But that is > just hand-waving, nice-to-do. > It was decided that multiboot2 will not be used, and initial interface did pass module types from GRUB to Xen via FDT, but then it was changed to generic xen_module with explicit type specification. Personally I think that leaving detection of how to use module should be left to loaded program, and that modules should include enough information so that this can be done. > >> module after that is assumed to be initrd (dom0 kernel always must be >> the very first module provided). > > That is true. >> >> On arm there is no detection - module type is taken from FDT; if no >> module type is provided, the first unknown module is assumed to be >> kernel, the second - initrd. >> >> See also http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2016-02/msg00333.html >> >>> Is this .. order dependency written somewhere in a document? In the >>> Xen code-base that is? >>> >>
diff --git a/docs/grub.texi b/docs/grub.texi index 82f6fa4..0f99c50 100644 --- a/docs/grub.texi +++ b/docs/grub.texi @@ -3861,9 +3861,7 @@ you forget a command, you can run the command @command{help} * videoinfo:: List available video modes @comment * xen_*:: Xen boot commands * xen_hypervisor:: Load xen hypervisor binary -* xen_linux:: Load dom0 kernel for xen hypervisor -* xen_initrd:: Load dom0 initrd for dom0 kernel -* xen_xsm:: Load xen security module for xen hypervisor +* xen_module:: Load xen modules for xen hypervisor @end menu @@ -5141,30 +5139,18 @@ verbatim as the @dfn{kernel command-line}. Any other binaries must be reloaded after using this command. @end deffn -@node xen_linux -@subsection xen_linux +@node xen_module +@subsection xen_module -@deffn Command xen_linux file [arguments] -Load a dom0 kernel image for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. +@deffn Command xen_module [--nounzip] file [arguments] +Load a module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. The rest of the line is passed verbatim as the module command line. +Each module will be identified by the order in which the modules are added. +The 1st module: dom0 kernel image +The 2nd module: dom0 ramdisk +All subsequent modules: UNKNOW @end deffn -@node xen_initrd -@subsection xen_initrd - -@deffn Command xen_initrd file -Load a initrd image for dom0 kernel at the booting process of xen. -@end deffn - -@node xen_xsm -@subsection xen_xsm - -@deffn Command xen_xsm file -Load a xen security module for xen hypervisor at the booting process of xen. -See @uref{http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XSM} for more detail. -@end deffn - - @node Networking commands @section The list of networking commands