Re: [Xen-devel] Design doc of adding ACPI support for arm64 on Xen - version 3

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 18/08/2015 00:01, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 18.08.15 at 08:43, <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > On 17/08/2015 22:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> 08/17/15 6:27 PM >>>
> > > > On 17/08/2015 08:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 14.08.15 at 16:59, <shannon.zhao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > b) Create EFI_MEMORY_DESCRIPTOR table. This will add memory start and
> > > > > > size information of Dom0. And Dom0 will get the memory information
> > > > > > through this EFI table.
> > > > > To some degree the same applies here: While I see that you have no
> > > > > legacy vehicle like x86's E820, I also don't see how Dom0 - not being
> > > > > able to make EFI boot or runtime services calls - would get hold of this
> > > > > table. And if a non-EFI mechanism is to be used here, using the EFI
> > > > > data structure would turn out to be just an arbitrary (or convenience)
> > > > > decision, not something inherently required. Which I think should be
> > > > > said explicitly if so, rather than leaving the reader guess.
> > > > It's not an arbitrary decision, when UEFI stub in Linux is using device
> > > > tree properties to pass the UEFI table to the kernel ([1]).
> > > >
> > > > When booting on Xen with ACPI, dom0 will use the non-EFI entry point.
> > > > The easiest way to pass the memory information to Linux is using the
> > > > UEFI DT properties.
> > > In which case it is even more arbitrary to use the EFI data structure to
> > > convey memory information (instead of expressing it in plain DT, which is
> > > how I blindly assume non-EFI does it). Of course there's the small chance
> > > that "UEFI DT properties" implies a certain binary format, but it's still
> > odd
> > > for a non-EFI entry point to assume EFI properties to be there...
> > Linux is able to boot either on ACPI or DT. When ACPI is used, the EFI
> > stub (mandatory) will create a small DT in order to pass the command
> > line and other informations (such as the EFI memory table) to the
> > kernel. This is because the stub is self-contained and and never use
> > variable living in the kernel.
> >
> > In order to know whether you are booting using DT or ACPI, they check if
> > the DT contains only the /chosen node.
> >
> > Actually the EFI-stub will always jumped on the non-EFI path.
> >
> > By passing the minimal DT as suggested on the design doc, we are
> > avoiding to get a different code path for Xen in the kernel and we are
> > finally acting as the EFI-stub was a nop for DOM0.
> >
> > So I don't see how this would be arbitrary...
> Indeed with your explanation this doesn't look arbitrary anymore.
> But none of this was spelled out in the original document.
Sorry I'm forgetting every time that you may not be aware of all the 
justifications.
Regards,

--
Julien Grall

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