From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/16] arm/xen: move GIC context data
 structure to gic driver
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 15:49:32 +0100
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1405281549190.4779@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
References: <1401100009-7326-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
	<1401100009-7326-8-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
	<53835079.1080707@linaro.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <53835079.1080707@linaro.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Cc: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, vijay.kilari@gmail.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, vijaya.kumar@caviumnetworks.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, 26 May 2014, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Vijay,
> 
> On 26/05/14 11:26, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
> > diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h
> > index 61a498f..f46b631 100644
> > --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h
> > +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/domain.h
> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> >   #include <asm/p2m.h>
> >   #include <asm/vfp.h>
> >   #include <asm/mmio.h>
> > +#include <asm/gic.h>
> >   #include <public/hvm/params.h>
> >   #include <xen/serial.h>
> > 
> > @@ -261,8 +262,10 @@ struct arch_vcpu
> >       uint32_t csselr;
> >       register_t vmpidr;
> > 
> > -    uint32_t gic_hcr, gic_vmcr, gic_apr;
> > -    uint32_t gic_lr[64];
> > +    /* Holds gic context data */
> > +    union gic_state_data gic;
> > +
> > +    uint64_t event_mask;
> 
> Why do you add back this field? It has been dropped on upstream...

Yes, weird.