On 29/05/15 16:55, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 16:44 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
+name = GCSPRINTF(cpu@%lx, mpidr_aff);
It's not necessary to change the cpu@.
AIUI it is conventional in DT for this to match the first reg entry.
Well, it's conventional when the reg
On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 16:44 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
+name = GCSPRINTF(cpu@%lx, mpidr_aff);
It's not necessary to change the cpu@.
AIUI it is conventional in DT for this to match the first reg entry.
Ian.
Regards,
___
Xen-devel
Hi Chen,
On 28/05/15 11:15, Chen Baozi wrote:
From: Chen Baozi baoz...@gmail.com
According to ARM CPUs bindings, the reg field should match the MPIDR's
affinity bits. We will use AFF0 and AFF1 when constructing the reg value
of the guest at the moment, for it is enough for the current max
Hi Julien,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 05:08:08PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
On 29/05/15 16:55, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 16:44 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
+name = GCSPRINTF(cpu@%lx, mpidr_aff);
It's not necessary to change the cpu@.
AIUI it is conventional in
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 10:08:21AM +0800, Chen Baozi wrote:
Hi Julien,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 05:08:08PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
On 29/05/15 16:55, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 16:44 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
+name = GCSPRINTF(cpu@%lx, mpidr_aff);
From: Chen Baozi baoz...@gmail.com
According to ARM CPUs bindings, the reg field should match the MPIDR's
affinity bits. We will use AFF0 and AFF1 when constructing the reg value
of the guest at the moment, for it is enough for the current max vcpu
number.
Signed-off-by: Chen Baozi
