From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDECFC2BA19 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FA07206D5 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=xen.org header.i=@xen.org header.b="At9en+Ra" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8FA07206D5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jOilW-0000T8-6k; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:11:46 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jOilU-0000Sp-M9 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:11:44 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 08f7c1be-7f23-11ea-8a58-12813bfff9fa Received: from mail.xenproject.org (unknown [104.130.215.37]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 08f7c1be-7f23-11ea-8a58-12813bfff9fa; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:11:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xen.org; s=20200302mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=msT6aM2AJ1K6oxv676k39If/2dJKOISIwujnmLA2iCE=; b=At9en+Ra03XHJWhwgHDwc0YlxC w/5c70mFXfsUtL4zsCpJwIdKc8a1osaDFY6qL7kv8+pwDb92FcqHiDZLYXS73+WAtfsuBhHWolHpL vNNmQn6AvYVEo8k2yMNmOLSi7ZUb+OIpmcX6M+Po26FfV8G3j23AVdFfFytjkdDDoYw8=; Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jOilR-0004lM-Oj; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:11:41 +0000 Received: from [54.239.6.177] (helo=a483e7b01a66.ant.amazon.com) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jOilR-0001wG-IJ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:11:41 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/12] xen/arm: if is_domain_direct_mapped use native UART address for vPL011 To: Stefano Stabellini , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org References: <20200415010255.10081-10-sstabellini@kernel.org> From: Julien Grall Message-ID: <05b46414-12c3-5f79-f4b1-46cf8750d28c@xen.org> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:11:40 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200415010255.10081-10-sstabellini@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Stefano Stabellini , Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" Hi Stefano, On 15/04/2020 02:02, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > We always use a fix address to map the vPL011 to domains. The address > could be a problem for domains that are directly mapped. > > Instead, for domains that are directly mapped, reuse the address of the > physical UART on the platform to avoid potential clashes. How do you know the physical UART MMIO region is big enough to fit the PL011? What if the user want to assign the physical UART to the domain + the vpl011? Cheers, -- Julien Grall