On 06.09.2023 03:16, Vikram Garhwal wrote:
> --- a/xen/include/public/sysctl.h
> +++ b/xen/include/public/sysctl.h
> @@ -1185,6 +1185,25 @@ typedef struct xen_sysctl_cpu_policy
> xen_sysctl_cpu_policy_t;
> DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_sysctl_cpu_policy_t);
> #endif
>
> +#if defined(__arm__) || defined (__aarch64__)
Nit (style): Please be consistent with defined().
> +/*
> + * XEN_SYSCTL_dt_overlay
> + * Performs addition/removal of device tree nodes under parent node using
> dtbo.
> + * This does in three steps:
> + * - Adds/Removes the nodes from dt_host.
> + * - Adds/Removes IRQ permission for the nodes.
> + * - Adds/Removes MMIO accesses.
> + */
> +struct xen_sysctl_dt_overlay {
> + XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_64(const_void) overlay_fdt; /* IN: overlay fdt. */
> + uint32_t overlay_fdt_size; /* IN: Overlay dtb size. */
> +#define XEN_SYSCTL_DT_OVERLAY_ADD 1
> +#define XEN_SYSCTL_DT_OVERLAY_REMOVE 2
> + uint8_t overlay_op; /* IN: Add or remove. */
> + uint8_t pad[3]; /* IN: Must be zero. */
> +};
> +#endif
> +
> struct xen_sysctl {
> uint32_t cmd;
> #define XEN_SYSCTL_readconsole 1
> @@ -1215,6 +1234,7 @@ struct xen_sysctl {
> #define XEN_SYSCTL_livepatch_op 27
> /* #define XEN_SYSCTL_set_parameter 28 */
> #define XEN_SYSCTL_get_cpu_policy 29
> +#define XEN_SYSCTL_dt_overlay 30
> uint32_t interface_version; /* XEN_SYSCTL_INTERFACE_VERSION */
> union {
> struct xen_sysctl_readconsole readconsole;
> @@ -1245,6 +1265,10 @@ struct xen_sysctl {
> #if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)
> struct xen_sysctl_cpu_policy cpu_policy;
> #endif
> +
> +#if defined(__arm__) || defined (__aarch64__)
Same here then.
While not to be done right here, ultimately I expect we want to
have some other way of specifying whether an arch wants DT-
specific sub-ops (here or elsewhere). As per the hyperlaunch
plans aiui even x86 may gain such support ...
Jan
> + struct xen_sysctl_dt_overlay dt_overlay;
> +#endif
> uint8_t pad[128];
> } u;
> };
