Re: [XenARM] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add support for a fake, para-virtualised machine

[Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:52:57PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On 4 December 2012 18:14, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Well, this depends on the guest taking an undefined instruction exception on
> > the smc, then deciding to issue an hvc instead and *then* having the
> > hypervisor somehow translate that into a PSCI invocation. It could work, but
> > it sounds easy to mess up and relies on the PSCI firmware co-existing with
> > things like kvm.
> 
> We can have enable-method DT entries independent of the SoC and one of
> them can be psci-hvc.

As soon as the support is there in the upper layers, we can do that.

> Just for clarification, AArch32 with virtualisation mandates the
> security extensions, so the SMC can be trapped. On AArch64 it is a bit
> tricky since the presence of EL3 is not mandate, in which case SMC
> would undef (don't as why ;). That's where we can have different
> enable methods specified via the DT.

Not entirely true: only ARMv7 mandates the security extensions in this
manner. You can still have ARMv8 CPUs running AArch32 code without the
security extensions.

Will

_______________________________________________
Xen-arm mailing list
Xen-arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-arm