From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/21] xen/arm: Initialize the virtual
 GIC later
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:11:31 -0700
Message-ID: <540F50E3.8050902@linaro.org>
References: <1406818852-31856-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>		<1406818852-31856-9-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>		<CAH_mUMNc67VKtRdLf0oMyKN4UJhoKmP2n_b4=Z3WU945bBt-Mg@mail.gmail.com>		<5400CD17.5060909@linaro.org>	
	<CAH_mUMMHrNkGO5+kNUi_0xvNsPJVqYY4_TWVGWavMStebcPOBw@mail.gmail.com>	
	<5400DCCC.9080303@linaro.org>
	<1410269584.8217.180.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <julien.grall@linaro.org>) id 1XRQpD-00075H-OC
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 19:11:35 +0000
Received: by mail-qa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id w8so15915970qac.40
	for <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>;
	Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1410269584.8217.180.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
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: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>, Andrii Tseglytskyi <andrii.tseglytskyi@globallogic.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Hi Ian,

On 09/09/14 06:33, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 16:04 -0400, Julien Grall wrote:
>>
>> On 29/08/14 15:49, Andrii Tseglytskyi wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> You will have to modify the function for your purpose. If you plan to PIRQ
>>>> == VIRQ every time, you could do smth like:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> d->arch.vgic.nr_spis = gic_number_lines() - 32;
>>>>
>>>> I assume, you already modified vgic_allocate_irq to return directly the
>>>> pirq, and do nothing in vgic_free_irq.
>>>
>>> Yes, locally I did the same as you mentioned, but I'm thinking about
>>> solution which will allow me to have 1 to 1 irq mapping and which will
>>> be acceptable for Xen mainline.
>>
>> IHMO, the best solution would adding a boolean in the new DOMCTL to
>> specify if we want to use PIRQ == VIRQ or not.
>
> Shouldn't it be up to the toolstack to pass in a suitably large nr_spis,
> i.e. at least as large as the maximum irq it wasn't to map 1:1?

For the moment, Xen always choose the VIRQ. Looking again to the 
hypercall, I think we can let the toolstack asking for a specific VIRQ.

For now, I don't handle this case. I will rework my series to do it. 
Hence, it will make patch #20 less uglier.

Also it would help Andrii use case and avoid him to carry a bigger patch :).

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall