From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 for 4.5] xen/arm: Add support for GICv3 for domU Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:45:09 +0000 Message-ID: <545B4325.9000801@linaro.org> References: <1414872625-2961-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org> <20141103163904.GF1638@laptop.dumpdata.com> <54590C48.4080100@linaro.org> <545A5B4F02000078000C1073@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XmJcv-0006cO-KB for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 09:45:13 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id d1so897415wiv.7 for ; Thu, 06 Nov 2014 01:45:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <545A5B4F02000078000C1073@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich , ian.campbell@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, konrad.wilk@oracle.com Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, vijay.kilari@gmail.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, tim@xen.org, Vijaya.Kumar@caviumnetworks.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi Jan, On 05/11/2014 17:15, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> Julien Grall 11/04/14 6:27 PM >>> >> On 11/03/2014 04:39 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >>> It also needs Acks from Daniel and Jan. >> >> This patch doesn't modify the x86 part. So I'm not sure if Jan ack is >> required. Would Ian C. ack be enough? > > Yes, it would. > >> Anyway, Jan do you have any objection on this patch? > > As said previously, I'm not particularly happy about it, but I also don't strongly > mind it going in in the current shape. May I ask what is wrong with the new approach to the a DOMCTL in this patch? The DOMCTL has been clearly identify as arm specific (there is "arm" in the name). Therefore it doesn't seem necessary to expose it for other architecture than ARM32 and ARM64. Regards, -- Julien Grall