| Message ID | 20190111131836.107549-5-sgarzare@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | pvh: add new PVH option rom | expand |
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 02:18:36PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > Use pvh.bin option rom when we are booting an uncompressed > kernel using the x86/HVM direct boot ABI. > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> > Based-on: <1545422632-24444-5-git-send-email-liam.merwick@oracle.com> > --- > hw/i386/pc.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c > index 06bce6a101..deab8a2816 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c > @@ -1005,6 +1005,10 @@ static void load_linux(PCMachineState *pcms, > fw_cfg_add_bytes(fw_cfg, FW_CFG_SETUP_DATA, > header, sizeof(header)); > > + option_rom[nb_option_roms].bootindex = 0; > + option_rom[nb_option_roms].name = "pvh.bin"; > + nb_option_roms++; > + xen_load_linux() has the following: assert(!strcmp(option_rom[i].name, "linuxboot.bin") || !strcmp(option_rom[i].name, "linuxboot_dma.bin") || !strcmp(option_rom[i].name, "multiboot.bin")); I wonder if it needs to be updated for pvh.bin?
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 5:34 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 02:18:36PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > Use pvh.bin option rom when we are booting an uncompressed > > kernel using the x86/HVM direct boot ABI. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> > > Based-on: <1545422632-24444-5-git-send-email-liam.merwick@oracle.com> > > --- > > hw/i386/pc.c | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c > > index 06bce6a101..deab8a2816 100644 > > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c > > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c > > @@ -1005,6 +1005,10 @@ static void load_linux(PCMachineState *pcms, > > fw_cfg_add_bytes(fw_cfg, FW_CFG_SETUP_DATA, > > header, sizeof(header)); > > > > + option_rom[nb_option_roms].bootindex = 0; > > + option_rom[nb_option_roms].name = "pvh.bin"; > > + nb_option_roms++; > > + > > xen_load_linux() has the following: > > assert(!strcmp(option_rom[i].name, "linuxboot.bin") || > !strcmp(option_rom[i].name, "linuxboot_dma.bin") || > !strcmp(option_rom[i].name, "multiboot.bin")); > > I wonder if it needs to be updated for pvh.bin? Yeah! I think we need to add pvh.bin on the assert in xen_load_linux(). Thanks for catching this, Stefano
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c index 06bce6a101..deab8a2816 100644 --- a/hw/i386/pc.c +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c @@ -1005,6 +1005,10 @@ static void load_linux(PCMachineState *pcms, fw_cfg_add_bytes(fw_cfg, FW_CFG_SETUP_DATA, header, sizeof(header)); + option_rom[nb_option_roms].bootindex = 0; + option_rom[nb_option_roms].name = "pvh.bin"; + nb_option_roms++; + return; } /* This looks like a multiboot kernel. If it is, let's stop
Use pvh.bin option rom when we are booting an uncompressed kernel using the x86/HVM direct boot ABI. Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> Based-on: <1545422632-24444-5-git-send-email-liam.merwick@oracle.com> --- hw/i386/pc.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)