Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen: make start_info x86 specific.

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 13:01 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 15.02.13 at 13:08, Stefano Stabellini 
> >>> <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/xen/interface.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/xen/interface.h
> >> @@ -51,6 +51,30 @@ DEFINE_GUEST_HANDLE(uint32_t);
> >>  DEFINE_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_pfn_t);
> >>  DEFINE_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_ulong_t);
> >>  
> >> +/*
> >> + * On ARM this is not part of the hypervisor ABI but we provide it
> >> + * internally for the benefit of common code.
> >> + */
> >> +struct start_info {
> >> +        uint32_t flags;             /* SIF_xxx flags.                     
> >>     */
> >> +        uint32_t store_evtchn;      /* Event channel for store 
> >> communication. */
> >> +        xen_pfn_t store_mfn;        /* MACHINE page number of shared 
> >> page.    */
> >> +        union {
> >> +                struct {
> >> +                        xen_pfn_t mfn;      /* MACHINE page number of 
> >> console page.   */
> >> +                        uint32_t  evtchn;   /* Event channel for console 
> >> page.        */
> >> +                } domU;
> >> +                struct {
> >> +                        uint32_t info_off;  /* Offset of console_info 
> >> struct.         */
> >> +                        uint32_t info_size; /* Size of console_info 
> >> struct from start.*/
> >> +                } dom0;
> >> +        } console;
> >> +  /* UNUSED ON ARM */
> >> +        unsigned long nr_pages;     /* Total pages allocated to this 
> >> domain.  */
> >> +};
> >> +#define SIF_PRIVILEGED    (1<<0)  /* Is the domain privileged? */
> >> +#define SIF_INITDOMAIN    (1<<1)  /* Is this the initial control domain? 
> >> */
> 
> With this it's even less clear to me why you want all of it removed
> from a architecture independent header.

struct start_info is a hypervisor on x86, on ARM it is not, it's use is
a purely internal convenience for the guest, to allow it to share common
code between x86 and ARM.

Maybe moving things on the guest side is overkill, I did it for symmetry
with the Xen side patches.

All I actually care about is the removal of struct start_info from the
canonical copy of the hypervisor ABI (that is xen/include/public) for
ARM.

Ian.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel