|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v4 13/14] arm/libxl: Emulated PCI device tree node in libxl
Rahul Singh writes ("Re: [PATCH v4 13/14] arm/libxl: Emulated PCI device tree
node in libxl"):
> Hi Ian
> > What is wrong with putting it in
> > libxl__arch_domain_build_info_setdefault
> > which I think exists precisely for this kind of thing ?
>
> As we have to set the arch_arm.vpci to false for x86 and ARM I
> thought it is right to move the code to common code to avoid
> duplication.
>
> Are you suggesting to put "
> libxl_defbool_setdefault(&b_info->arch_arm.vpci, false)”in
> libxl__arch_domain_build_info_setdefault() for x86 and ARM
> differently.
I've gone back and reread the whole thread, which I probably should
have done to start with....
So:
> >> #if defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__)
> >> /*
> >> * Enable VPCI support for ARM. VPCI support for DOMU guests is not
> >> * supported for x86.
> >> */
> >> if (d_config->num_pcidevs)
> >> libxl_defbool_set(&b_info->arch_arm.vpci, true);
> >> #endif
I think this logic probably ought to be in libxl, not in xl. We try
to make the libxl API "do the right thing" by default. In this case I
think that means to enable VPCI (i) on platforms where it's available
(ii) if the guest has PCI passthrough devices. Is that right ?
Sorry to ask these question now, and please forgive my ignorance:
Is VPCI inherently an ARM-specific ABI or protocol ? When might an
admin want to turn it on explicitly ?
How does this all relate to the (non-arch-specific) "passthrough"
option ?
Ian.
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |