Re: [PATCH 04/25 v6] xen/arm: vpl011: Add support for vuart in libxl

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>]

On 07/28/2017 03:42 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 03:14:31PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
>> Hi Wei,
>>
>> On 07/28/2017 02:49 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 11:08:24PM +0530, Bhupinder Thakur wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 18 July 2017 at 17:00, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> CC x86 maintainers
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:19:19PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        ("arch_arm", Struct(None, [("gic_version", libxl_gic_version),
>>>>>>> +                               ("vuart", libxl_vuart_type),
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... here it is ARM specific. I am not convinced that we should tie vuart to
>>>>>> ARM only. I cannot see why x86 would not be able to use it in the future.
>>>>>> Any opinions?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know. I asked Bhupinder to put it here because it looked arm
>>>>> specific to me. I will let x86 maintainers to decide whether they want
>>>>> such thing.
>>>>
>>>> What is the decision on this?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this email probably slipped through the crack for Andrew
>>> and Jan.
>>>
>>> I've prodded Andrew on IRC so he might chime in.
>>>
>>>> I believe that since most of the vuart code added in libxl is arch
>>>> agnostic, it should be fine to keep the libxl_vuart_type as a generic
>>>> type.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What about the actual emulation code? Is that arch-agnostic? If not, I
>>> personally don't see a chance of having vuart emulation for x86 in the
>>> near future and I'm inclined to keep the code as-is.
>>>
>>> There is always the option to lift the struct to common code in the
>>> future.
>>
>> Lifting the struct to common will imply to add compatibility code, right?
> 
> Yes.

I would try to avoid that. But you are the maintainer, so it is your 
call :).

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel