From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/24] xen/arm: Implement hypercall
 PHYSDEVOP_{, un}map_pirq
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 16:04:10 +0000
Message-ID: <1424707450.27930.191.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1421159133-31526-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<1421159133-31526-14-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1501281848150.9702@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<54C932BF.5070009@linaro.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1501291210490.9702@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<54CA2709.9080409@linaro.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1501291233120.9702@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<1424451224.30924.357.camel@citrix.com>
	<54EB01E102000078000625CB@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1424705290.27930.161.camel@citrix.com> <54EB4CE7.3040509@linaro.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>) id 1YPvVy-0000q8-Bh
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 16:05:46 +0000
In-Reply-To: <54EB4CE7.3040509@linaro.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, tim@xen.org, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 15:53 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> 
> On 23/02/15 15:28, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 09:33 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>>> On 20.02.15 at 17:53, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>> Jan, do you have any feeling for how this is going to play out on x86
> >>> with the vapic stuff?
> >>
> >> The vapic logic shouldn't require any physdevop involvement, so if
> >> I read right what you propose (not having such a requirement /
> >> connection on ARM) either, I agree that a new domctl should be all
> >> that's needed (if XEN_DOMCTL_{,un}bind_pt_irq can't be re-used).
> > 
> > Actually, I think bind_pt_irq with a new PT_IRQ_TYPE_* would be a good
> > option.
> > 
> > An ARM SPI is a bit like an ISA IRQ, but not close enough to reuse IMHO
> > (and the datatype would need widening).
> 
> We have to think about MSI and other type too...
> 
> In any case a DOMCTL is not suitable here because a guest kernel may
> need to map/unmap IRQ too (think about ACPI or device passthrough).

I don't follow, setting up device passthrough is very much a toolstack
operation, isn't it? Where does the guest kernel get involved?

As for ACPI, I think dom0 propagating ACPI derived platform info to Xen
should be handled differently (at the hypercall interface at least)
separate from passthrough.

Ian.