qemu-arm
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] hw/vfio/platform: Add Qualcomm Te


From: Shanker Donthineni
Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] hw/vfio/platform: Add Qualcomm Technologies, Inc HIDMA device support
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:52:40 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0

Eric/Alex,

Seems everyone was agreed, and add support for a generic vfio platform device class. I'm going to drop this HIDMA patch since the new generic vfio platform device class will cover.

Shanker

On 08/19/2016 06:43 AM, Auger Eric wrote:
Hi Alex,

On 19/08/2016 00:35, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 18 Aug 2016, at 05:37, Auger Eric <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi Shanker,

Adding Alex in CC for (*)

On 14/08/2016 17:42, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
This patch introduces the Qualcomm Technologies, Inc HIDMA device and
allows passthrough the host HIDMA device to a guest machine using the
vfio-platform framework.

A platform device tree node is created for the guest machine which
contains the compat string 'qcom,hidma-1.0', mmio regions, active high
SPIs, and an optional property dma-coherent.

Signed-off-by: Vikram Sethi <address@hidden>
Signed-off-by: Shanker Donthineni <address@hidden>
---
Changes sicnce v1:
  combined patches [v1 1/2] and [v1 2/2].
Some general comments:
- I preferred the previous series organization where we had the
creation
of the VFIO device first and its sysbus-fdt dynamic instantiation in a
separate patch.

Peter requested sysbus-fdt stops growing and advised to split the fine
into generic helpers and specific dt creation functions in separate
files. This sounds the right moment to do it with looming new VFIO
devices.
(*) Also I am now reconsidering the relevance of creating specific VFIO
devices per compat string. At the begining of VFIO QEMU integration
history we made that choice, advised by Alex (Graf), considering the
QEMU VFIO device could not be generic. With a little more experience
now
we could see the specialization is currently done in the dt creation
function (sysbus-fdt) and in the kernel reset module. So I would now
advocate using a non abstract base VFIO device that could be
instantiated passing its compat string as property. Creating
hw/vfio/qcom-hidma.c and include/hw/vfio/vfio-qcom-hidma.h then would
become useless. Alex, what is your feeling now?
Back when we set up the rule we were concerned with a few things that a
generic sysbus devices can’t implement properly:
   * generic reset
   * power control
   * clock control

I guess the first two are mostly a matter of the in-kernel driver, not
the user space one. Clock control hopefully isn’t much of a thing with
real hardware ;).
So yes, if you can make a generic driver work, I’m not opposed.
Thank you for the confirmation!

Best Regards

Eric

Alex


--
Shanker Donthineni
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm 
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
Foundation Collaborative Project.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]