From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 22/24] tools/libxl: arm: Use an higher
 value for the GIC phandle
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:28:49 +0000
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1501291226450.9702@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
References: <1421159133-31526-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<1421159133-31526-23-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1501291106350.9702@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<54CA21EE.9050407@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>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <Stefano.Stabellini@citrix.com>) id 1YGoDh-0003El-1T
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:29:13 +0000
In-Reply-To: <54CA21EE.9050407@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: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, ian.campbell@citrix.com, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, tim@xen.org, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 29/01/15 11:07, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Jan 2015, Julien Grall wrote:
> >> The partial device tree may contains phandle. The Device Tree Compiler
> >> tends to allocate the phandle from 1.
> >>
> >> Reserve the ID 65000 for the GIC phandle. I think we can safely assume
> >> that the partial device tree will never contain a such ID.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
> >> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> >> Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
> >>
> > 
> > Shouldn't we at least check that the partial device tree doesn't contain
> > a conflicting phandle?
> 
> I don't think so. This will unlikely happen, and if it happens the guest
> will crash with an obvious error.

It is good that the error is obvious.

But how expensive is to check for it?
Think about the poor user that ends up in this situation: the fact that
is unlikely only makes it harder for a user to figure out what to do to
fix it.