linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: introduce a DTS for Xen unprivileged virtual machines

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1209201333460.29232@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:39:58 +0100
From:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
CC:	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: introduce a DTS for Xen unprivileged virtual
 machines

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Versatile Express is flexible enough to be a good base for our own
> > virtual machine platform, especially if the maintainers keep an eye on
> > getting everything through DT and not expecting devices just to be there
> > ;-)
> 
> Perhaps what we want is a stricter subset of the stuff in mach-vexpress
> then. But if so then this should be expressed both in the DT and in the
> code, not just papered over by declaring things compatible when they are
> not.

But it is already expressed in the DT, by removing all the device nodes
we don't emulated. And it is already expressed in the code, by fully
discovering peripherals via DT, therefore not trying to initialize
non-present devices.


> > > > +	gic: interrupt-controller@...01000 {
> > > > +		compatible = "arm,cortex-a9-gic";
> > > 
> > > Don't we mean "arm,cortex-a15-gic" here? That's what we actually
> > > provide. I'm not sure how the a9 and a15 differ.
> > 
> > The GIC that comes with vexpress is a9 compatible.
> 
> The GIC which Xen emulates is the one which matters here though, and
> that is an a15.

The a15 gic is still a9 compatible. OK to be precise I am going to add
"arm,cortex-a15-gic", but I cannot really remove "arm,cortex-a9-gic".
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/