[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 02/11] xen/arm: vpl011: Add new hvm params in Xen for ring buffer/event setup
Hi Jan, On 06/03/17 08:06, Jan Beulich wrote: On 05.03.17 at 13:35, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:On 02/21/2017 11:25 AM, Bhupinder Thakur wrote:--- a/xen/include/public/hvm/params.h +++ b/xen/include/public/hvm/params.h @@ -203,10 +203,17 @@ */ #define HVM_PARAM_ACPI_IOPORTS_LOCATION 19 -/* Deprecated */ +#if defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__) +#define HVM_PARAM_VPL011_CONSOLE_PFN 20 +#define HVM_PARAM_VPL011_CONSOLE_EVTCHN 21 +#define HVM_PARAM_VPL011_VIRQ 22 +#else #define HVM_PARAM_MEMORY_EVENT_CR0 20 #define HVM_PARAM_MEMORY_EVENT_CR3 21 #define HVM_PARAM_MEMORY_EVENT_CR4 22Those parameters are still deprecated but you drop the comment stating that.+#endif +Those params are x86 specific so should have never been set on ARM. But I am not sure if it is fine to re-purpose deprecated number. I have CCed "The REST" maintainers to have their input here.I think re-purposing something that was never (meant to be) used is fine in a case like this. However, the question is moot with your suggestion to not use params here in the first place. I suggested to drop HVM_PARAM_VPL011_VIRQ because we can hardcode the guest interrupt number for the UART as we already do for the MMIO region. The 2 other HVM_PARAM looks sensible to me. I thought a bit more about those params. I think the name should be generic and not tie to pl011 because we may want to emulate different UART for the guest in the future. Also, by re-using deprecated encoding it means that it will not be possible to use those parameters on x86 if you ever decide to emulate UART in Xen. I am not sure whether if you are happy with that? Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |