>>> On 22.01.16 at 16:51, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: > El 22/01/16 a les 16.31, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>>> On 22.01.16 at 15:59, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: >>> If that's the plan, then I think we would also need to fixup the tables >>> provided to Dom0 in order to match what's available, but that can be >>> discussed later. >> >> I don't see what you're getting at here: The IO-APIC information >> should be usable as is for Dom0 (as is the case for PV). > > Well, the information it's usable, but the IO-APIC is not accessible by > Dom0, you need to use PHYSDEV ops in order to manage it. One of my aims > would be to get rid of quite of the PHYSDEV/PIRQ ops for Dom0, and > instead provide an emulated local and IO APICs. That would also allow us > to make use of posted-interrupts I assume (although I certainly need to > look more deeply into this).
Wait - you're aware that some of the IO-APIC setup in the hypervisor requires Dom0's help? Presenting it with other than the real ACPI tables would seem to make this impossible. > In this case, how are we going to signal Dom0 that the local and IO > APICs reported by ACPI are usable using the bare mental interfaces? With the above I'm not sure the answer to this would really matter. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel