[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/19] xen/arm: Add ITS support
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello Vijay, > > On 03/03/2015 03:55, Vijay Kilari wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 02/03/15 12:30, vijay.kilari@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Add ITS support for arm. Following major features >>>> are supported >>>> - GICv3 ITS support for arm64 platform >>>> - Supports only single ITS node >>> >>> >>> Why only one ITS node supported? I though Cavium was using 2 ITS... >> >> >> I will update for 2 ITS nodes later when NUMA is supported > > > Why do you speak about NUMA? AFAICT, there is no requirement to support NUMA > for having multiple ITS... > > With multiple ITS support, your vITS emulation will likely heavily change. > So it would be nice to have this support as soon as possible. Incremental changes (as separate patch series) would be more meaningful. I will have a look at it and if possible I will incorporate in next series > >>> >>>> - LPI descriptors are allocated on-demand >>>> - Only ITS Dom0 is supported >>> >>> >>> Any plan to support guest? >> >> >> Yes, I will do it in next version > > > What is missing to support guest? Only the toolstack part? Yes, it is only toolstack part similar to GICv3 > >>> >>>> Vijaya Kumar K (19): >>>> xen/arm: add linked list apis >>>> xen/arm: its: Import GICv3 ITS driver from linux >>>> xen/arm: its: Port ITS driver to xen >>> >>> >>> A general comment (I haven't read closely the patches). The GICv3 ITS >>> taken from Linux is modified so heavily (rename function, move out code, >>> dropping unused code...) that your assumption in patch #1 [1] is wrong. >>> >>> At the end of this series it would make impossible to backport patch >>> from Linux. >> >> >> Most of the code is reused or moved to different file based on Xen >> requirement. >> - code like msi registered callback (setup_irq & teardown_irq) is of >> no use in Xen. So removed >> - irq_chip is different in linux >> - some of the functions like encode of ITS commands can be used in >> virtual ITS >> driver as well. So have to be moved out to header file >> - the LPI allocation is moved to virtual ITS driver. We can >> consider it keeping in physical ITS >> driver but it fits well in virtual ITS driver rather than >> physical ITS driver. > > > IHMO, moving the code around two files make the code more difficult to > review because the patch is bigger. > > That also means we can't really review the first couple of patches because > the code will change a lot after. > > But the maintainers may be disagree with me... > >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> [1] "This is actual GICv3 ITS driver from Linux. [..] This helps to >>> import any issues found in Linux" >> >> >> I have kept the linux GICv3 ITS driver in first patch and made incremental >> changes just to have better understanding and incremental approach > > > But this is doesn't help to backport issue from Linux... > > BTW, do you have a tree with all the code? Yes, I have a tree, But I cannot share it. Github is ok? _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |