[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Embedded-pv-devel] [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 13/18] xen: introduce and use 'dom0_rambase_pfn' setting for kernel Dom0
On Fri, 20 May 2016, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 04:04:43PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > Hello Oleksandr, > > > > On 20/05/16 15:19, Oleksandr Dmytryshyn wrote: > > >On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>>>On 20.05.16 at 10:45, <oleksandr.dmytryshyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>>>>>On 19.05.16 at 15:58, <oleksandr.dmytryshyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>>>Case 1: Dom0 is driver domain: > > >>>>>There is a Ducati firmware which runs on dedicated M4 core and decodes > > >>>>>video. This firmware uses hardcoded physical addresses for graphics > > >>>>>buffers. Those addresses should be inside address-space of the driver > > >>>>>domain (Dom0). Ducati firmware is proprietary and we have no ability > > >>>>>to rework it. So Dom0 kernel should be placed to the configured > > >>>>>address (to the DOM0 RAM bank with specific address). > > >>>>> > > >>>>>Case 2: Dom0 is Thin and DomD is driver domain. > > >>>>>All is the same: Ducati firmware requires special (hardcoded) > > >>>>>addresses. > > >>>> > > >>>>For both of these cases I would then wonder whether such > > >>>>environments are actually suitable for doing virtualization on. > > >>>Currently we use Jacinto 6 evaluation board with DRA74X processor. > > >>>We have both configurations (Thin Dom0 and Thich Dom0). > > >> > > >>Which says nothing about their suitability for virtualization. > > >Our solution is based on Jacinto 6 evaluation board with DRA74X > > >processor. We need video-playback. Ducati firmware decodes video and > > >it works only with hardcoded addresses so we need this patch. > > > > This patch is a way to solve the problem and may not be the only one. > > I would like to explore all the possibilities before taking an approach that > > requires to modify the memory allocator in Xen. > > > > In my previous mails, I suggested a different solution (see [1] and [2]). If > > you think it is not suitable, please share more details or explain why you > > think your patch is the only way to solve it. > > Hi, > > We have similar needs (not exactly the same) in some of our setups. > We need to map certain OCMs (On Chip Memories) to dom0. Among other things, > these are used to communicate with remote accelerators/CPUs that have > "hardcoded" addresses to these RAMs. > > Our approach is more along the lines of Juliens second suggestion. We're > trying to use the mmio-sram DTS bindings to bring in these memories into > dom0. > > IIUC the Ducati FW issue correctly, you need to allocate a chunk of DDR. > > Another possible solution: > I think you could reserve the memory area by simply not mentioning it > in the main memory node (these nodes support multiple ranges so you can > introduce gaps). Then you could for example create an mmio-sram node to > get the memory explicitely mapped 1:1 into dom0. > > Just a moment ago, I posted an RFC for the mmio-sram support to the list. This sounds much nicer that the solution proposed here. _______________________________________________ Embedded-pv-devel mailing list Embedded-pv-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/embedded-pv-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |