From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/4] xen/arm64: Map the redistributor region
 by max_vcpus of domU danamically
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 18:51:59 +0100
Message-ID: <5554E0BF.50409@citrix.com>
References: <1431612863-3762-1-git-send-email-cbz@baozis.org>
	<1431612863-3762-2-git-send-email-cbz@baozis.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.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <julien.grall@citrix.com>) id 1YsxJC-0007tq-Sk
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 14 May 2015 17:52:34 +0000
In-Reply-To: <1431612863-3762-2-git-send-email-cbz@baozis.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: Chen Baozi <cbz@baozis.org>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Cc: julien.grall@citrix.com, Chen Baozi <baozich@gmail.com>, ian.campbell@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Chen,

On 14/05/15 15:14, Chen Baozi wrote:
> diff --git a/xen/common/domctl.c b/xen/common/domctl.c
> index e571e76..43b9f79 100644
> --- a/xen/common/domctl.c
> +++ b/xen/common/domctl.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@
>  #include <public/domctl.h>
>  #include <xsm/xsm.h>
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM_64
> +#include <asm/gic.h>
> +#include <asm/vgic.h>
> +#endif
> +
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(domctl_lock);
>  DEFINE_SPINLOCK(vcpu_alloc_lock);
>  
> @@ -680,6 +685,11 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) u_domctl)
>              d->max_vcpus = max;
>          }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM_64
> +        if (!is_hardware_domain(d) && d->arch.vgic.version == GIC_V3)
> +            vgic_v3_rdist_map(d);
> +#endif

That is very hackish. It's common with other architecture and we are
trying to be vgic agnostic in general. A vGIC callback would be more
suitable.

Although, as said on the cover letter. It's not necessary to allocate
dynamically. We can expand the current region to support up to 16/128 vCPUs.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall