Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 19/19] libxl: build a device tree for ARM guests

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2013-11-14 at 12:17 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Ian Campbell writes ("[PATCH v5 19/19] libxl: build a device tree for ARM 
> > guests"):
> > > Uses xc_dom_devicetree_mem which was just added. The call to this needs 
> > > to be
> > > carefully sequenced to be after xc_dom_parse_image (so we can tell which 
> > > kind
> > > of guest we are building, although we don't use this yet) and before
> > > xc_dom_mem_init which tries to decide where to place the FDT in guest RAM.
> > > 
> > > Removes libxl_noarch which would only have been used by IA64 after this
> > > change. Remove IA64 as part of this patch.
> > > 
> > > There is no attempt to expose this as a configuration setting for the 
> > > user.
> > > 
> > > Includes a debug hook to dump the dtb to a file for inspection.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > > TODO:
> > > - v7 CPU compat is hardcoded to cortex-a15 -- may need to define 
> > > something more
> > >   generic via mach-virt dt bindngs?
> > 
> > I don't have an opinion on this.  I hope someone else does :-).
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to use the same cpu compatibility string of the
> platform? After all it's the physical cpu that we are time slicing for
> the guest: if any quirks are present, it is likely that they are going
> to affect the guest too.

That is one option, but would require us to get at that string somehow
from userspace (perhaps a new domctl, or add it to physinfo etc).

I think we should punt on it for now and coordinate with other mach-virt
users (e.g. KVM) so we all follow the same approach, whatever that might
be.

Ian.


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