Il 10/09/2014 12:09, Alexander Graf ha scritto: > Fair enough. > > As far as moving "platform bus" logic into sysbus, I'd really like to > hold back and see what this whole thing ends up getting used for first. > > So for now, I'd definitely prefer to keep "platform bus" logic and > "sysbus" logic separate. If we realize that every user only ever uses > the dynamic sysbus creation in conjunction with our "platform bus" > implementation, we can merge them. I agree. As you pointed out, we have two usecases: 1) arbitrary dynamic sysbus devices, because you're playing with board design or because you're working on a virtualized platform 2) pluggable components in a fixed board design (e.g. CCSR) The only thing they share is FDT creation. The other part, which is assigning the interrupts and memory regions, is different: case (1) has it driven by command line or simply bottom-to-top; case (2) has it driven by an implementation of a spec. It's not even clear to me that E500 CCSR devices should be sysbus, in fact... Paolo _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
