From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
No functional change intended.
Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
---
xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
.../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
index b11cb583a763..6eeae97293f2 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -170,13 +170,6 @@ config NEW_VGIC
problems with the standard emulation.
At the moment this implementation is not security supported.
-config HAS_VUART_PL011
- bool "Emulated SBSA UART console support"
- default y
- help
- Allows a guest to use SBSA Generic UART as a console. The
- SBSA Generic UART implements a subset of ARM PL011 UART.
-
config HAS_VUART_MMIO
bool "Emulated UART for hardware domain"
default y
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
index dd015a2a19e8..8475043d8701 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
@@ -65,7 +65,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_ITS) += vgic-v3-its.o
endif
obj-$(CONFIG_VM_EVENT) += vm_event.o
obj-y += vtimer.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_VUART_PL011) += vpl011.o
obj-y += vsmc.o
obj-y += vpsci.o
obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_VUART_MMIO) += vuart.o
diff --git a/xen/drivers/Kconfig b/xen/drivers/Kconfig
index 20050e9bb8b3..5e533b260004 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/drivers/Kconfig
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ source "drivers/pci/Kconfig"
source "drivers/video/Kconfig"
+source "drivers/vuart/Kconfig"
+
config HAS_VPCI
bool
diff --git a/xen/drivers/Makefile b/xen/drivers/Makefile
index 2a1ae8ad130a..510820472938 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/Makefile
+++ b/xen/drivers/Makefile
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ obj-y += char/
obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_CPUFREQ) += cpufreq/
obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_PCI) += pci/
obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_VPCI) += vpci/
+obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_VUART) += vuart/
obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_PASSTHROUGH) += passthrough/
obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += acpi/
obj-$(CONFIG_VIDEO) += video/
diff --git a/xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig b/xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..d8df0f6d1b3c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+config HAS_VUART
+ bool
+
+if (ARM_32 || ARM_64)
+
+config HAS_VUART_PL011
+ bool "Emulated PL011 UART support"
+ default y
+ select HAS_VUART
+ help
+ Allows a guest to use SBSA Generic UART as a console. The
+ SBSA Generic UART implements a subset of ARM PL011 UART.
+
+endif
diff --git a/xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile b/xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..3b7069f1cf95
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_VUART_PL011) += vuart-pl011.o
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c b/xen/drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c
similarity index 100%
rename from xen/arch/arm/vpl011.c
rename to xen/drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c
--
2.34.1On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
>
> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> ---
> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
may want moving then ...
Jan
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >
> > Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
> >
> > No functional change intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> > ---
> > xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
> > xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
> > xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
> > xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> > xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
> > .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
> > 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
> > create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
> > rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
>
> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
> may want moving then ...
re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
>
> Jan
On 24.06.2025 09:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
>>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
>>>
>>> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
>>>
>>> No functional change intended.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
>>> ---
>>> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
>>> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
>>> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
>>> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
>>> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
>>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
>>> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
>>
>> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
>> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
>> may want moving then ...
>
> re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
>
> Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
Or maybe common/emul/... This wants discussing, I think.
Jan
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:33:04AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.06.2025 09:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> >>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >>>
> >>> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
> >>>
> >>> No functional change intended.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
> >>> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
> >>> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
> >>> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> >>> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >>> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
> >>> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
> >>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
> >>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
> >>> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
> >>
> >> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
> >> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
> >> may want moving then ...
> >
> > re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
> >
> > Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
>
> Or maybe common/emul/... This wants discussing, I think.
Will something like the following work
common/hvm/vuart
?
>
> Jan
On 10.07.2025 03:59, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:33:04AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.06.2025 09:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
>>>>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
>>>>>
>>>>> No functional change intended.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
>>>>> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
>>>>> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
>>>>> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
>>>>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
>>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
>>>>> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
>>>>
>>>> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
>>>> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
>>>> may want moving then ...
>>>
>>> re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
>>>
>>> Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
>>
>> Or maybe common/emul/... This wants discussing, I think.
>
> Will something like the following work
> common/hvm/vuart
> ?
Not really, emulators may not be limited to HVM. But iirc common/emul/ is
what we settled on anyway at the last Community Call?
Jan
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 10:15:54AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.07.2025 03:59, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:33:04AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 24.06.2025 09:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> >>>>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No functional change intended.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
> >>>>> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
> >>>>> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
> >>>>> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> >>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
> >>>>> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
> >>>>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
> >>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
> >>>>> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
> >>>>
> >>>> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
> >>>> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
> >>>> may want moving then ...
> >>>
> >>> re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
> >>>
> >>> Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
> >>
> >> Or maybe common/emul/... This wants discussing, I think.
> >
> > Will something like the following work
> > common/hvm/vuart
> > ?
>
> Not really, emulators may not be limited to HVM. But iirc common/emul/ is
> what we settled on anyway at the last Community Call?
Sorry, I missed today's call, did not know about the decision.
>
> Jan
>
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.07.2025 03:59, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:33:04AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 24.06.2025 09:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> >>>>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No functional change intended.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
> >>>>> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
> >>>>> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
> >>>>> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> >>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
> >>>>> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
> >>>>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
> >>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
> >>>>> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
> >>>>
> >>>> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
> >>>> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
> >>>> may want moving then ...
> >>>
> >>> re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
> >>>
> >>> Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
> >>
> >> Or maybe common/emul/... This wants discussing, I think.
> >
> > Will something like the following work
> > common/hvm/vuart
> > ?
>
> Not really, emulators may not be limited to HVM. But iirc common/emul/ is
> what we settled on anyway at the last Community Call?
Yes, that is what I recall as well
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 10:00:10AM -0700, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 10.07.2025 03:59, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:33:04AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> On 24.06.2025 09:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 07:50:33AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>>> On 24.06.2025 05:56, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
> > >>>>> From: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Move PL011 emulator to the new location for UART emulators.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> No functional change intended.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Denis Mukhin <dmukhin@ford.com>
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>> xen/arch/arm/Kconfig | 7 -------
> > >>>>> xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 1 -
> > >>>>> xen/drivers/Kconfig | 2 ++
> > >>>>> xen/drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> > >>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > >>>>> xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile | 1 +
> > >>>>> .../arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} | 0
> > >>>>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > >>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Kconfig
> > >>>>> create mode 100644 xen/drivers/vuart/Makefile
> > >>>>> rename xen/{arch/arm/vpl011.c => drivers/vuart/vuart-pl011.c} (100%)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I question the placement under drivers/. To me, driver != emulator. I
> > >>>> wonder what others think. But yes, we already have drivers/vpci/. That
> > >>>> may want moving then ...
> > >>>
> > >>> re: driver != emulator: I agree; but I followed drivers/vpci.
> > >>>
> > >>> Do you think common/vuart would be a better location?
> > >>
> > >> Or maybe common/emul/... This wants discussing, I think.
> > >
> > > Will something like the following work
> > > common/hvm/vuart
> > > ?
> >
> > Not really, emulators may not be limited to HVM. But iirc common/emul/ is
> > what we settled on anyway at the last Community Call?
>
> Yes, that is what I recall as well
Ack, will use common/emul/
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.