[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Design doc of adding ACPI support for arm64 on Xen
On 05/08/15 17:52, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Julien Grall wrote: >>> On 05/08/15 14:03, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2015/8/5 20:48, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>> On 05/08/15 12:49, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>>>>>>> That's great! >>>>>>>>> Keep in mind that many ARM platforms have non-PCI busses, so I think >>>>>>>>> we'll need an amba and a platform bus_notifier too, in addition to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> existing pci bus notifier. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for your reminding. I thought about amba. Since ACPI of current >>>>>>> linux kernel doesn't support probe amba bus devices, so this >>>>>>> bus_notifier will not be used at the moment. But there are some voice >>>>>>> that we need to make ACPI support amba on the linux arm kernel mail >>>>>>> list. And to me it doesn't matter to add the amba bus_notifier. >>>>> This comment raised one question. What happen if the hardware has MMIO >>>>> region not described in the ACPI? >>>>> >>>> This sounds weird. If a device is described in ACPI table, it will not >>>> describe the MMIO region which the driver will use? Does this situation >>>> exist? >>> >>> Buggy ACPI tables, not possible to describe the ACPI ... There is plenty >>> of reason. >>> >>> I don't know if there is current problem on ACPI (I don't have much work >>> with it). But it presents on the device tree. We may a lots of specific >>> platform mapping in Xen (see specific_mapping) because of buggy DT. >>> >>> We can't rule out and needs to provide a way to cope with this. If we >>> don't do it, it will fall on us sooner or later. >>> >>>> If the hardware has mmio region not described in the ACPI, how does the >>>> driver know the region and use it? >>> >>> Hardcoded. >> >> I wouldn't worry about buggy drivers or tables for now. >> >> I think that the Linux maintainers should take care of that by refusing >> to merge any drivers that do such a thing anyway. > > If worse comes to worst, we can do the mapping from the platform file in > Xen, which is bad, but would be appropriate to work around buggy > firmware. True. Although, I seem to remembered that it wasn't possible to get the name of the platform (or something similar) in Xen with ACPI. Anyway, let's wait until someone provides a such platform. I just wanted to mention in case we find a better place to call the mapping hypercall. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |