From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 7 14:50:36 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E96B7A4 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 14:50:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ea0-f173.google.com (mail-ea0-f173.google.com [209.85.215.173]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D312A1E73 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 14:50:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ea0-f173.google.com with SMTP id o10so252555eaj.18 for ; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 06:50:33 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oJrmNayZ7gcSCDVuYE0I7/7StUnf4uKZIdoVqCdk1rs=; b=OC1KfVZd7qsDlx7E59riCw/zB0TjiGaVyZhvBm4qzqHiTkkakcG/sypfyFzyys7MOG lkSJjD/fDL17tDCVuxKxj4lnztr08SG7c902RQqoI/Pt79YDOZJAVYYm1DvYB81tua+r kbfgeZ2CZ6QG7hhDZvxxBNVQsYGbe+03YKzPy9Q5xm/5h6hri3MqAys3mNKGfa0AmKkd K8HnY9VNgKZT661jlFJ5FMuNuvLpOUwZW8WiTyRK+TTdzh4c9tbCHvcUy4MJcsbOqX9K 0xT3VuUHQ4cRyr0Wqki3nCuqob07ZBeREByg/Z4acR+D6i66hkMcZubp0VElVAOxKVq/ ZpyA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlzhy9WIcChoZMX7lp/3vvySDhCF3Zkdw5s0zX+bw4yCD6Jrp/oUyhS3C/EwxIatx9nFSjh X-Received: by 10.14.99.66 with SMTP id w42mr90958eef.63.1389104875724; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 06:27:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.80.2.139] ([185.25.64.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 7sm35571011eee.12.2014.01.07.06.27.54 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Jan 2014 06:27:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52CC0EE8.6060205@linaro.org> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 14:27:52 +0000 From: Julien Grall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131104 Icedove/17.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?Um9nZXIgUGF1IE1vbm7DqQ==?= Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 15/19] xen: create a Xen nexus to use in PV/PVH References: <1388677433-49525-1-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com> <1388677433-49525-16-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com> <52C9D4CA.6070403@linaro.org> <52CA78DE.9060502@citrix.com> <52CA9481.4090703@linaro.org> <52CBBB05.6020104@citrix.com> In-Reply-To: <52CBBB05.6020104@citrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org, julien.grall@citrix.com, freebsd-xen@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, kib@freebsd.org, gibbs@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 14:50:36 -0000 On 01/07/2014 08:29 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On 06/01/14 12:33, Julien Grall wrote: >> >> >> On 01/06/2014 09:35 AM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On 05/01/14 22:55, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 01/02/2014 03:43 PM, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >>>>> Introduce a Xen specific nexus that is going to be in charge for >>>>> attaching Xen specific devices. >>>> >>>> Now that we have a xenpv bus, do we really need a specific nexus for >>>> Xen? >>>> We should be able to use the identify callback of xenpv to create the >>>> bus. >>>> >>>> The other part of this patch can be merged in the patch #14 "Introduce >>>> xenpv bus and a dummy pvcpu device". >>> >>> On x86 at least we need the Xen specific nexus, or we will fall back to >>> use the legacy nexus which is not what we really want. >>> >> >> Oh right, in any case can we use the identify callback of xenpv to add >> the bus? > > AFAICT this kind of bus devices don't have a identify routine, and they > are usually added manually from the specific nexus, see acpi or legacy. > Could you add the device on ARM when you detect that you are running as > a Xen guest, or in the generic ARM nexus if Xen is detected? Is there any reason to not add identify callback? If it's possible, I would like to avoid as much as possible #ifdef XENHVM in ARM code. -- Julien Grall