Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm: Do not expose PMU to domain 0

2015-06-05 Thread Julien Grall
On 05/06/15 11:25, Ian Campbell wrote: On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 11:17 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Ian, On 04/06/2015 17:49, Ian Campbell wrote: It uses a PPI which we cannot route to a guest, and will surely need more support than just that anyway. I noticed this on Mustang with UEFI where

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm: Do not expose PMU to domain 0

2015-06-05 Thread Ian Campbell
On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 12:20 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: On 05/06/15 11:25, Ian Campbell wrote: On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 11:17 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Ian, On 04/06/2015 17:49, Ian Campbell wrote: It uses a PPI which we cannot route to a guest, and will surely need more support than

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm: Do not expose PMU to domain 0

2015-06-05 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Ian, On 04/06/2015 17:49, Ian Campbell wrote: It uses a PPI which we cannot route to a guest, and will surely need more support than just that anyway. I noticed this on Mustang with UEFI where the built in DTB contains a node of this type. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm: Do not expose PMU to domain 0

2015-06-05 Thread Ian Campbell
On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 11:17 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Ian, On 04/06/2015 17:49, Ian Campbell wrote: It uses a PPI which we cannot route to a guest, and will surely need more support than just that anyway. I noticed this on Mustang with UEFI where the built in DTB contains a node

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm: Do not expose PMU to domain 0

2015-06-04 Thread Ian Campbell
It uses a PPI which we cannot route to a guest, and will surely need more support than just that anyway. I noticed this on Mustang with UEFI where the built in DTB contains a node of this type. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com --- xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c |1 + 1 file