On Tue, 8 Aug 2023, Daniel P. Smith wrote: > > Thanks for the example, it is finally clear! > > > > I don't think we should add hardware_dom=1 to the command line (I don't > > know if it was just an example to make it easier to understand for me). > > Instead it should a property on device tree. hardware_dom=1 is not great > > because it is tied to the order of domain construction. Instead it > > should be a device tree property under the specific domain. That way you > > can clearly specify which one is tradition dom0, or which is > > hardware_domain and which is control_domain. > > I was describing with today's code, how you would launch a late hardware > domain. The logic to trigger the hardware transfer from dom0 to the hardware > domain is triggered by the command line parameter `hardware-dom`. With > hyperlaunch, this can eventually be retired and separate control domain and > hardware domain can be constructed at launch as we expose access to > roles/capabilities through its DT interface.
+1 > > > > which I don't understand > > > > > > Did the above help? > > > > A lot, thanks! > > Your welcome, glad I was able to articulate it better this time. Thanks for the explanation, it all looks good to me.
