[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 16/16] xen/arm: add SGI handling for GICv3
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/11/2014 01:35 PM, Vijay Kilari wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi Vijay, >>> >>> On 05/26/2014 11:26 AM, vijay.kilari@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v3.c b/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v3.c >>>> index d80683d..99d0d46 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v3.c >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v3.c >>> >>> [..] >>> >>>> +int vgic_emulate(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, union hsr hsr) >>>> +{ >>> >>> You are by-passing without any reason the vgic structure. Why didn't you >>> add a new callback there? >> >> Sorry, I could not get you. Can you please be more clear? > > Why didn't you add a callback in the vgic structure? > > The vgic structure is per-domain, so it's perfectly valid (even though > it's not you use case) to run a GICv2 guest and a GICv3 guest at the > same time. > In GICv3 case the sending SGI by guest raises sysreg trap where as in GICv2 it raises mmio write trap. So these traps lands in respective vgic driver. ( mmio write trap => vgic-v2.c and sysreg => vgic-v3.c) These vgic-v{2,3}.c driver calls generic vgic driver to inject SGI to VCPU. If I understand correctly, you mean creating callback in vgic, which is common function in vgic driver and from there it should call respective vgic-v{2,3}.c driver. > On the former, you don't want to let the guest send an SGI via this > solution. > > Regards, > > -- > Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |