Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 09/16] SUPPORT.md: Add ARM-specific virtual hardware

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi George,

On 13/11/17 15:41, George Dunlap wrote:
> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Do we need to add anything more here?
>
> And do we need to include ARM ACPI for guests?
>
> CC: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>
> CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>   SUPPORT.md | 10 ++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/SUPPORT.md b/SUPPORT.md
> index b95ee0ebe7..8235336c41 100644
> --- a/SUPPORT.md
> +++ b/SUPPORT.md
> @@ -412,6 +412,16 @@ Virtual Performance Management Unit for HVM guests
>   Disabled by default (enable with hypervisor command line option).
>   This feature is not security supported: see 
> http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-163.html
>   
> +### ARM/Non-PCI device passthrough
> +
> +    Status: Supported
Sorry I didn't notice that until now. I am not comfortable to say 
"Supported" without any caveats.
As with PCI device passthrough, you at least need an IOMMU present on 
the platform. Sadly, it does not mean all DMA-capable devices on that 
platform will be protected by the IOMMU. This is also assuming, the 
IOMMU do sane things.
There are potentially other problem coming up with MSI support. But I 
haven't yet fully thought about it.
> +
> +### ARM: 16K and 64K page granularity in guests
> +
> +    Status: Supported, with caveats
> +
> +No support for QEMU backends in a 16K or 64K domain.
> +
>   ## Virtual Hardware, QEMU
>   
>   These are devices available in HVM mode using a qemu devicemodel (the default).
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall

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