[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v4 13/14] arm/libxl: Emulated PCI device tree node in libxl
Rahul Singh writes ("Re: [PATCH v4 13/14] arm/libxl: Emulated PCI device tree node in libxl"): > Hi Ian > > What is wrong with putting it in > > libxl__arch_domain_build_info_setdefault > > which I think exists precisely for this kind of thing ? > > As we have to set the arch_arm.vpci to false for x86 and ARM I > thought it is right to move the code to common code to avoid > duplication. > > Are you suggesting to put " > libxl_defbool_setdefault(&b_info->arch_arm.vpci, false)”in > libxl__arch_domain_build_info_setdefault() for x86 and ARM > differently. I've gone back and reread the whole thread, which I probably should have done to start with.... So: > >> #if defined(__arm__) || defined(__aarch64__) > >> /* > >> * Enable VPCI support for ARM. VPCI support for DOMU guests is not > >> * supported for x86. > >> */ > >> if (d_config->num_pcidevs) > >> libxl_defbool_set(&b_info->arch_arm.vpci, true); > >> #endif I think this logic probably ought to be in libxl, not in xl. We try to make the libxl API "do the right thing" by default. In this case I think that means to enable VPCI (i) on platforms where it's available (ii) if the guest has PCI passthrough devices. Is that right ? Sorry to ask these question now, and please forgive my ignorance: Is VPCI inherently an ARM-specific ABI or protocol ? When might an admin want to turn it on explicitly ? How does this all relate to the (non-arch-specific) "passthrough" option ? Ian.
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |