[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1406181523340.13771@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:30:25 +0100
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
CC: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
<andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
<ian.campbell@...rix.com>, <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
<jeremy@...p.org>, <matt.fleming@...el.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
<boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
<eshelton@...ox.com>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
<linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] efi: Introduce EFI_NO_DIRECT flag
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 18.06.14 at 15:52, <matt@...sole-pimps.org> wrote:
> > EFI_PARAVIRT will be usable by architectures other than x86, correct? If
> > your intention is for it only ever to be used by x86, then it should
> > probably be EFI_ARCH_2.
>
> I would expect ARM, once it gets UEFI support on the Xen side, to
> be able to handle most of this identically to x86. Which raises the
> question whether most of the new Xen-specific code (in one of the
> other patches) wouldn't better live under drivers/xen/.
I was thinking the same thing.
However this patch series doesn't add much code outside
drivers/xen/efi.c and include/xen/interface/platform.h.
I think it wouldn't be fair to ask Daniel to refactor the efi code
currently under arch/x86 to an arch-independent location.
Whoever comes in later and adds EFI Xen support for ARM can do that.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists