From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1030665Ab2GLLtM (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 12 Jul 2012 07:49:12 -0400
Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:44331 "EHLO
	SMTP.EU.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752621Ab2GLLtK (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 12 Jul 2012 07:49:10 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,573,1336348800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="13500735"
Message-ID: <4FFEB9B4.2040307@citrix.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:49:08 +0100
From: Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@citrix.com>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.4 (Macintosh/20120616)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
        Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>,
        "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
        "Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xen.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH WIP 2/6] xen/arm: Introduce xen_guest_init
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1206221644370.27860@kaball.uk.xensource.com> <1340381685-22529-1-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <1340381685-22529-2-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <20120709144505.GD12102@phenom.dumpdata.com> <4FFAF3E3.7070306@citrix.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FFAF3E3.7070306@citrix.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

David Vrabel wrote:
> On 09/07/12 15:45, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 05:14:41PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> We used to rely on a core_initcall to initialize Xen on ARM, however
>>> core_initcalls are actually called after early consoles are initialized.
>>> That means that hvc_xen.c is going to be initialized before Xen.
>>>
>>> Given the lack of a better alternative, just call a new Xen
>>> initialization function (xen_guest_init) from xen_cons_init.
>>>
>>> xen_guest_init has to be arch independant, so write both an ARM and an
>>> x86 implementation. The x86 implementation is currently empty because we
>>> can be sure that xen_hvm_guest_init is called early enough.
>>>
>>> Probably we can get rid of this as soon as we have better DT support.
>> What is DT?
> 
> Device Tree.  It's a binary describing the hardware and some system
> configuration that is passed to the kernel by the boot loader or (in
> this case) the hypervisor.  Vaguely analogous to ACPI except it's not
> crazy ;).
> 
> We really should get the device tree bindings sorted out before
> accepting any kernel side patches.  I think we can do this even if Xen's
> device tree support is incomplete.

Will this be passed from the hypervisor to the linux kernel using a
specific mechanism (different than the native one)?