On 07/17/2013 12:05:41 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 17.07.2013, at 18:59, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 11:04:08 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 17.07.2013, at 17:59, Bhushan Bharat-R65777 wrote:
>> > Ah, so we can choose any address range in ccsr space of a PV
machine (-M ppce500 / e500plat).
>> No, we don't put it in CCSR space. It'd just be orthogonal to CCSR.
>
> I'd rather we put it in CCSR, especially if/when we implement LAWs
and CCSRBAR which gives the guest control of its address space.
Do we have space in CCSR?
Sure. Even on real hardware there are gaps, and on the paravirt
platform we have loads of space. :-)
This does raise the question of what compatible the ccsr node should
have on the paravirt platform. Currently it's still labelled
"fsl,mpc8544-immr", which is clearly wrong. If we add CCSRBAR support,
should the paravirt platform have it as well? If so, what is the size
of CCSR on the paravirt platform?
-Scott
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
