From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] xen/arm: introduce PLATFORM_QUIRK_GUEST_PIRQ_NEED_EOI Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 15:43:49 +0100 Message-ID: <53BD5525.3000203@linaro.org> References: <1404484784-30659-1-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <1404909672.16789.23.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <1404916813.11945.29.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1404916813.11945.29.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell , Anup Patel Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Pranavkumar Sawargaonkar , Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/09/2014 03:40 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >> I think we should check GIC Dist address passed in DTS by >> u-boot to Xen. If GIC Dist address is secured address then >> enable the quirk otherwise disable the qurik. > > Isn't IGROUPR readable from NS? In which case we should be able to spot > the difference, I think? > > Stefano, you might want to arrange in your patch to cache the value of > the quirk in the gicv2 struct -- otherwise all the calls to > platform_has_quirk are going to add up. Can't we cache the value in the platform code? I don't think it's too expensive to call the platform_has_quirk in this case. Regards, -- Julien Grall