Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/N] xen: arm: rework early bring up

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 18:33 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 09/17/2013 02:37 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The following reworks early bring up on ARM to use a separate set of
> > boot pagetables. This simplifies things by avoiding the need to bring up
> > all CPUs in lock step, which in turn allows us to do secondary CPU
> > bringup in C code.
> > 
> > Unfortunately the main bulk of this change is a single large patch which
> > is hard to decompose any further since it is basically pulling on the
> > thread and then knitting a new jumper from it.
> > 
> > With these changes Xen now absolutely requires that the bootloader calls
> > the hypervisor in HYP mode, the previous workarounds have been removed.
> > For use on models a bootwrapper is now required. See 
> >         git://xenbits.xen.org/people/ianc/boot-wrapper.git xen-arm32
> >         git://xenbits.xen.org/people/ianc/boot-wrapper-aarch64.git xen-arm64
> > 
> > I have implemented support for CPU bringup on the fastmodel vexpress
> > platforms (v7and v8) here, I suppose it should work OK on a real
> > vexpress too but I've not tried it.
> 
> I have just tried the patch series on the versatile express and it
> doesn't work. I'm using the u-boot from Andre and all the cpus already
> boot in hyp mode (checked without this patch series).

:-(

The code should essentially the same as the old kick cpus, but
reimplemented in C. The only difference I can spot is that the C version
is kicking a single CPU at a time while the ASM version is kicking
everyone at once. Does using send_SGI_allbutself instead work as a hack?

Perhaps our idea of the CPUID is wrong or something? Your patches to
fixup the logical CPU id stuff might help?

Ian.



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