Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH v3 15/18] xen/arm: ITS: Add domain specific ITS initialization

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2015-06-22 at 17:31 +0530, vijay.kilari@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Add Domain and vcpu specific ITS initialization
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c     |   17 ++++++++++++++++
>  xen/arch/arm/setup.c          |    1 +
>  xen/arch/arm/vgic-v3-its.c    |   45 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  xen/arch/arm/vgic-v3.c        |    1 +
>  xen/include/asm-arm/gic-its.h |    3 +++
>  xen/include/asm-arm/vgic.h    |    1 +
>  6 files changed, 68 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c
> index 4471669..8aa1ec5 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic-v3-its.c
> @@ -1234,6 +1234,23 @@ static int its_force_quiescent(void __iomem *base)
>      }
>  }
>  
> +void its_domain_init(struct domain *d)
> +{
> +    struct its_node *its;
> +
> +    if ( is_hardware_domain(d) )
> +    {
> +        list_for_each_entry(its, &its_nodes, entry)
> +        {
> +            /* XXX: Assign only first physical ITS address */

I think we settled upon rewriting the msi-parent properties in the dts
to all refer to a single vits, in which case putting that vits in the
first pits' hole seem ok.

Rather than an XXX (which is a TODO) a comment explaining what is going
on would be preferable.

Ian


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