| Message ID | 1464670986-10256-6-git-send-email-zhaoshenglong@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Hello, On 06/06/16 12:40, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Tue, 31 May 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote: >> From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >> >> Construct GTDT table with the interrupt information of timers. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >> --- >> tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >> index 9e99159..0fb4f69 100644 >> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ >> #include "libxl_libfdt_compat.h" >> >> #include <xc_dom.h> >> +#include <acpi_defs.h> >> #include <stdbool.h> >> #include <libfdt.h> >> #include <assert.h> >> @@ -880,13 +881,85 @@ out: >> return rc; >> } >> >> +static void make_acpi_header(struct acpi_table_header *h, const char *sig, >> + int len, uint8_t rev) >> +{ >> + memcpy(&h->signature, sig, 4); >> + h->length = len; >> + h->revision = rev; >> + memcpy(h->oem_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, 6); >> + memcpy(h->oem_table_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); >> + memcpy(h->oem_table_id + 4, sig, 4); >> + h->oem_revision = 1; >> + memcpy(h->asl_compiler_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); >> + h->asl_compiler_revision = 1; >> + h->checksum = 0; >> +} >> + >> +static void make_acpi_gtdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) >> +{ >> + struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor *gtdt; >> + >> + gtdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*gtdt)); >> + >> + gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_S_PPI; >> + gtdt->secure_el1_flags = (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >> + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >> + gtdt->non_secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; >> + gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags = >> + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >> + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >> + gtdt->virtual_timer_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_VIRT_PPI; >> + gtdt->virtual_timer_flags = >> + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >> + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >> + >> + make_acpi_header(>dt->header, "GTDT", sizeof(*gtdt), 2); >> + >> + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.table = (void *)gtdt; >> + /* Align to 64bit. */ >> + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size = sizeof(*gtdt); >> + dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size; >> +} >> + >> +static int prepare_acpi(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, >> + libxl__domain_build_state *state, >> + struct xc_dom_image *dom) >> +{ >> + const libxl_version_info *vers; >> + >> + /* convenience aliases */ >> + xc_domain_configuration_t *xc_config = &state->config; >> + >> + vers = libxl_get_version_info(CTX); >> + if (vers == NULL) >> + return ERROR_FAIL; >> + >> + LOG(DEBUG, "constructing ACPI tables for Xen version %d.%d guest", >> + vers->xen_version_major, vers->xen_version_minor); >> + >> + /* Alloc memory for ACPI blob placeholders. */ >> + dom->acpitable_blob = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(struct acpitable_blob)); >> + dom->acpitable_size = 0; >> + >> + make_acpi_gtdt(gc, dom); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> int libxl__arch_domain_init_hw_description(libxl__gc *gc, >> libxl_domain_build_info *info, >> libxl__domain_build_state *state, >> struct xc_dom_image *dom) >> { >> + int rc; >> + >> assert(info->type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV); >> - return prepare_dtb(gc, info, state, dom); >> + rc = prepare_dtb(gc, info, state, dom); >> + if (rc) >> + return rc; >> + >> + return prepare_acpi(gc, info, state, dom); >> } > > ACPI tables for ARM guests should be user configurable: acpi=1 in the VM > config file enables them, with default off. The VM system specification for ARM [1] mandates that both ACPI and DT should be provided and described the entire VM and its peripheral (see the section "Hardware Description"). Furthermore, the user may not know if the guest OS will use ACPI or DT For instance Redhat is using ACPI whilst Debian is using DT. So we have to provide both by default. However, 32-bit domain should only have Device-Tree table created. Anyway, the reason should have been described in the commit message. I would split this patch in two: introducing prepare ACPI and then GTDT table. So we can provide details in the commit message. Regards, [1] http://people.linaro.org/~christoffer.dall/VMSystemSpecificationForARM-v2.0-rc1.pdf
On 2016年06月06日 20:04, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jun 2016, Julien Grall wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > On 06/06/16 12:40, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> > > On Tue, 31 May 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>> > > > From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Construct GTDT table with the interrupt information of timers. >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >>>> > > > --- >>>> > > > tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c | 75 >>>> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>>> > > > 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> > > > >>>> > > > diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >>>> > > > index 9e99159..0fb4f69 100644 >>>> > > > --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >>>> > > > +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >>>> > > > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ >>>> > > > #include "libxl_libfdt_compat.h" >>>> > > > >>>> > > > #include <xc_dom.h> >>>> > > > +#include <acpi_defs.h> >>>> > > > #include <stdbool.h> >>>> > > > #include <libfdt.h> >>>> > > > #include <assert.h> >>>> > > > @@ -880,13 +881,85 @@ out: >>>> > > > return rc; >>>> > > > } >>>> > > > >>>> > > > +static void make_acpi_header(struct acpi_table_header *h, const char >>>> > > > *sig, >>>> > > > + int len, uint8_t rev) >>>> > > > +{ >>>> > > > + memcpy(&h->signature, sig, 4); >>>> > > > + h->length = len; >>>> > > > + h->revision = rev; >>>> > > > + memcpy(h->oem_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, 6); >>>> > > > + memcpy(h->oem_table_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); >>>> > > > + memcpy(h->oem_table_id + 4, sig, 4); >>>> > > > + h->oem_revision = 1; >>>> > > > + memcpy(h->asl_compiler_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); >>>> > > > + h->asl_compiler_revision = 1; >>>> > > > + h->checksum = 0; >>>> > > > +} >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > +static void make_acpi_gtdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) >>>> > > > +{ >>>> > > > + struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor *gtdt; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + gtdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*gtdt)); >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_S_PPI; >>>> > > > + gtdt->secure_el1_flags = (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << >>>> > > > ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >>>> > > > + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << >>>> > > > ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >>>> > > > + gtdt->non_secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; >>>> > > > + gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags = >>>> > > > + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << >>>> > > > ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >>>> > > > + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << >>>> > > > ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >>>> > > > + gtdt->virtual_timer_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_VIRT_PPI; >>>> > > > + gtdt->virtual_timer_flags = >>>> > > > + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << >>>> > > > ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >>>> > > > + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << >>>> > > > ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + make_acpi_header(>dt->header, "GTDT", sizeof(*gtdt), 2); >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.table = (void *)gtdt; >>>> > > > + /* Align to 64bit. */ >>>> > > > + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size = sizeof(*gtdt); >>>> > > > + dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size; >>>> > > > +} >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > +static int prepare_acpi(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, >>>> > > > + libxl__domain_build_state *state, >>>> > > > + struct xc_dom_image *dom) >>>> > > > +{ >>>> > > > + const libxl_version_info *vers; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + /* convenience aliases */ >>>> > > > + xc_domain_configuration_t *xc_config = &state->config; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + vers = libxl_get_version_info(CTX); >>>> > > > + if (vers == NULL) >>>> > > > + return ERROR_FAIL; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + LOG(DEBUG, "constructing ACPI tables for Xen version %d.%d guest", >>>> > > > + vers->xen_version_major, vers->xen_version_minor); >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + /* Alloc memory for ACPI blob placeholders. */ >>>> > > > + dom->acpitable_blob = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(struct >>>> > > > acpitable_blob)); >>>> > > > + dom->acpitable_size = 0; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + make_acpi_gtdt(gc, dom); >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + return 0; >>>> > > > +} >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > int libxl__arch_domain_init_hw_description(libxl__gc *gc, >>>> > > > libxl_domain_build_info >>>> > > > *info, >>>> > > > libxl__domain_build_state >>>> > > > *state, >>>> > > > struct xc_dom_image *dom) >>>> > > > { >>>> > > > + int rc; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > assert(info->type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV); >>>> > > > - return prepare_dtb(gc, info, state, dom); >>>> > > > + rc = prepare_dtb(gc, info, state, dom); >>>> > > > + if (rc) >>>> > > > + return rc; >>>> > > > + >>>> > > > + return prepare_acpi(gc, info, state, dom); >>>> > > > } >>> > > >>> > > ACPI tables for ARM guests should be user configurable: acpi=1 in the VM >>> > > config file enables them, with default off. >> > >> > The VM system specification for ARM [1] mandates that both ACPI and DT should >> > be provided and described the entire VM and its peripheral (see the section >> > "Hardware Description"). >> > >> > Furthermore, the user may not know if the guest OS will use ACPI or DT For >> > instance Redhat is using ACPI whilst Debian is using DT. >> > >> > So we have to provide both by default. However, 32-bit domain should only have >> > Device-Tree table created. >> > >> > Anyway, the reason should have been described in the commit message. I would >> > split this patch in two: introducing prepare ACPI and then GTDT table. So we >> > can provide details in the commit message. > All right, let me rephrase then: we should have a VMSPEC=on or off to > enable or disable compliance with the VM system specification for ARM. > (The good thing about specifications is that there are so many to choose > from.) With compliance disabled, we can avoid introducing ACPI tables > for the guest. > > Given that "VMSPEC" is cumbersome, I suggest to introduce a simpler and > more meaningful alias: "ACPI" :-) > > I am open to discussion on what the default should be, but there needs > to be a way to disable ACPI. I don't know why we need to disable ACPI because we can provide ACPI tables but guest could choose to not use it. And for ARM32 domain, since the linux guest kernel doesn't support ACPI, even we provide ACPI tables, it can't use it, anyway. Thanks,
Hello, On 06/06/16 13:04, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jun 2016, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 06/06/16 12:40, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Tue, 31 May 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>> From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >>> >>> ACPI tables for ARM guests should be user configurable: acpi=1 in the VM >>> config file enables them, with default off. >> >> The VM system specification for ARM [1] mandates that both ACPI and DT should >> be provided and described the entire VM and its peripheral (see the section >> "Hardware Description"). >> >> Furthermore, the user may not know if the guest OS will use ACPI or DT For >> instance Redhat is using ACPI whilst Debian is using DT. >> >> So we have to provide both by default. However, 32-bit domain should only have >> Device-Tree table created. >> >> Anyway, the reason should have been described in the commit message. I would >> split this patch in two: introducing prepare ACPI and then GTDT table. So we >> can provide details in the commit message. > > All right, let me rephrase then: we should have a VMSPEC=on or off to > enable or disable compliance with the VM system specification for ARM. > (The good thing about specifications is that there are so many to choose > from.) With compliance disabled, we can avoid introducing ACPI tables > for the guest. > > Given that "VMSPEC" is cumbersome, I suggest to introduce a simpler and > more meaningful alias: "ACPI" :-) The VM specification introduces other components such as a SBSA UART emulation (which is not yet implemented by Xen). Do we want an option for each components? > > I am open to discussion on what the default should be, but there needs > to be a way to disable ACPI. Agree with that.
Hi Stefano, On 06/06/16 15:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jun 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote: >> I don't know why we need to disable ACPI because we can provide ACPI >> tables but guest could choose to not use it. And for ARM32 domain, since >> the linux guest kernel doesn't support ACPI, even we provide ACPI >> tables, it can't use it, anyway. > > Memory usage. Simplicity: if you know you are not going to use ACPI, you > might as well disable it to have one less moving piece (every line of > code is potential for a bug). Guest configuration: if your guest > operating system supports both ACPI and Device Tree and you want to be > sure that Device Tree is the one that gets used, then you can do it by > disabling ACPI at the VM level. Linux offers a command line option to do > that, but other OSes might not and could choose ACPI by default. Other OSes would have the same problem on baremetal. A VM should reproduce the baremetal behavior. If you have enabled both ACPI and DT in your kernel, then you greed to let the kernel choose for you. However, I agree that an having option to enable/disable ACPI is useful. The main use case would be embedded environment where ACPI will less used. Regards,
Hello, On 06/06/16 13:18, Wei Liu wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 01:02:57PM +0800, Shannon Zhao wrote: >> +static int prepare_acpi(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, >> + libxl__domain_build_state *state, >> + struct xc_dom_image *dom) > > libxl__prepare_acpi > > I would also suggest moving ACPI related functions to a dedicated file > (libxl_arm_acpi.c) so that the possible future merger with x86 code can > be made easier. +1 and it makes sense to have the code to build the Device Tree and the ACPI tables in a separate files. Regards,
Hello Shannon, On 31/05/16 06:02, Shannon Zhao wrote: > diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c > index 9e99159..0fb4f69 100644 > --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c > +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > #include "libxl_libfdt_compat.h" > > #include <xc_dom.h> > +#include <acpi_defs.h> > #include <stdbool.h> > #include <libfdt.h> > #include <assert.h> > @@ -880,13 +881,85 @@ out: > return rc; > } > > +static void make_acpi_header(struct acpi_table_header *h, const char *sig, > + int len, uint8_t rev) > +{ > + memcpy(&h->signature, sig, 4); > + h->length = len; > + h->revision = rev; > + memcpy(h->oem_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, 6); > + memcpy(h->oem_table_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); > + memcpy(h->oem_table_id + 4, sig, 4); > + h->oem_revision = 1; > + memcpy(h->asl_compiler_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); > + h->asl_compiler_revision = 1; > + h->checksum = 0; Should not we compute the checksum here? > +} > + > +static void make_acpi_gtdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) > +{ > + struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor *gtdt; > + > + gtdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*gtdt)); > + > + gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_S_PPI; > + gtdt->secure_el1_flags = (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) > + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); There is no secure EL1 for guest, so this should be 0. > + gtdt->non_secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; > + gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags = > + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) > + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); > + gtdt->virtual_timer_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_VIRT_PPI; > + gtdt->virtual_timer_flags = > + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) > + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); > + > + make_acpi_header(>dt->header, "GTDT", sizeof(*gtdt), 2); > + > + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.table = (void *)gtdt; > + /* Align to 64bit. */ I am not sure what the comment is for. > + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size = sizeof(*gtdt); > + dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size; > +} Regards,
On 07/06/16 12:30, Shannon Zhao wrote: > On 2016/6/7 19:19, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 31/05/16 06:02, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>> +static void make_acpi_gtdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) >>> +{ >>> + struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor *gtdt; >>> + >>> + gtdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*gtdt)); >>> + >>> + gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_S_PPI; >>> + gtdt->secure_el1_flags = (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << >>> ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >>> + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << >>> ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >> >> There is no secure EL1 for guest, so this should be 0. >> > So why does DT add secure EL1 timer in make_timer_node()? Because the DT binding mandates the secure EL1 IRQ. However this interrupt will never be asserted by the virtual timer. Regards,
On 07/06/16 12:39, Shannon Zhao wrote: > > > On 2016/6/7 19:36, Julien Grall wrote: >> >> >> On 07/06/16 12:30, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>> On 2016/6/7 19:19, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> On 31/05/16 06:02, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>>> +static void make_acpi_gtdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor *gtdt; >>>>> + >>>>> + gtdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*gtdt)); >>>>> + >>>>> + gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_S_PPI; >>>>> + gtdt->secure_el1_flags = (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << >>>>> ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) >>>>> + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << >>>>> ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); >>>> >>>> There is no secure EL1 for guest, so this should be 0. >>>> >>> So why does DT add secure EL1 timer in make_timer_node()? >> >> Because the DT binding mandates the secure EL1 IRQ. However this >> interrupt will never be asserted by the virtual timer. > Oh, right. But it's harmless. Anyway, I'll remove this. Correct, but let's not expose things a guest could not use :). Regards,
Hello Shannon, On 17/06/16 04:29, Shannon Zhao wrote: > On 2016/6/6 19:40, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> ACPI tables for ARM guests should be user configurable: acpi=1 in the VM >> config file enables them, with default off. > While the configuration "acpi" already exists for HVM guest > configuration, do we plan to reuse it or use a new name, e.g. arm_acpi? We always try to re-use options unless their meaning are completely different. Regards,
On 17/06/16 10:15, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jun 2016, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hello Shannon, >> >> On 17/06/16 04:29, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>> On 2016/6/6 19:40, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>>> ACPI tables for ARM guests should be user configurable: acpi=1 in the VM >>>> config file enables them, with default off. >>> While the configuration "acpi" already exists for HVM guest >>> configuration, do we plan to reuse it or use a new name, e.g. arm_acpi? >> >> We always try to re-use options unless their meaning are completely different. > > I agree. "acpi" is a good name for it. I would avoid introducing > something like "arm_acpi". BTW, this value should be default false for at least 32-bit domain. I am not sure if we agreed what should be the default for 64-bit domain. Cheers,
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c index 9e99159..0fb4f69 100644 --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ #include "libxl_libfdt_compat.h" #include <xc_dom.h> +#include <acpi_defs.h> #include <stdbool.h> #include <libfdt.h> #include <assert.h> @@ -880,13 +881,85 @@ out: return rc; } +static void make_acpi_header(struct acpi_table_header *h, const char *sig, + int len, uint8_t rev) +{ + memcpy(&h->signature, sig, 4); + h->length = len; + h->revision = rev; + memcpy(h->oem_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, 6); + memcpy(h->oem_table_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); + memcpy(h->oem_table_id + 4, sig, 4); + h->oem_revision = 1; + memcpy(h->asl_compiler_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME4, 4); + h->asl_compiler_revision = 1; + h->checksum = 0; +} + +static void make_acpi_gtdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) +{ + struct acpi_gtdt_descriptor *gtdt; + + gtdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*gtdt)); + + gtdt->secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_S_PPI; + gtdt->secure_el1_flags = (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); + gtdt->non_secure_el1_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_PHYS_NS_PPI; + gtdt->non_secure_el1_flags = + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); + gtdt->virtual_timer_interrupt = GUEST_TIMER_VIRT_PPI; + gtdt->virtual_timer_flags = + (ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_MODE) + |(ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW << ACPI_GTDT_INTERRUPT_POLARITY); + + make_acpi_header(>dt->header, "GTDT", sizeof(*gtdt), 2); + + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.table = (void *)gtdt; + /* Align to 64bit. */ + dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size = sizeof(*gtdt); + dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->gtdt.size; +} + +static int prepare_acpi(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, + libxl__domain_build_state *state, + struct xc_dom_image *dom) +{ + const libxl_version_info *vers; + + /* convenience aliases */ + xc_domain_configuration_t *xc_config = &state->config; + + vers = libxl_get_version_info(CTX); + if (vers == NULL) + return ERROR_FAIL; + + LOG(DEBUG, "constructing ACPI tables for Xen version %d.%d guest", + vers->xen_version_major, vers->xen_version_minor); + + /* Alloc memory for ACPI blob placeholders. */ + dom->acpitable_blob = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(struct acpitable_blob)); + dom->acpitable_size = 0; + + make_acpi_gtdt(gc, dom); + + return 0; +} + int libxl__arch_domain_init_hw_description(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, libxl__domain_build_state *state, struct xc_dom_image *dom) { + int rc; + assert(info->type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV); - return prepare_dtb(gc, info, state, dom); + rc = prepare_dtb(gc, info, state, dom); + if (rc) + return rc; + + return prepare_acpi(gc, info, state, dom); } static void finalise_one_memory_node(libxl__gc *gc, void *fdt,