Hi, On 19 April 2017 at 16:31, Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com> wrote: > There were some concerns on the first version about using HVM params because > this is tying the virtual UART to HVM and only allow us to have one virtual > console. > > HVM params are part of the stable ABI, so this would restrict ourselves to > future extension. > > It was suggested to look at the DOMCTL way, I would have expected to some > investigation and a summary in the cover letter. So why do we keep HVM > PARAM?
It is more flexible to use DOMCTL interface in terms of supporting multiple vUARTs in future without changing the interface. This DOMCTL interface cannot be called from xenconsoled though because xenconsoled does not know the PFN to be passed to Xen. It is ok to call this DOMCTL interface from the toolstack since it knows the PFN and can pass it on to Xen. Regards, Bhupinder _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
