From: "Theo de Raadt" Subject: Re: cpu_xcall glue for arm64 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: david@gwynne.id.au, tech@openbsd.org Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 14:36:12 -0600 Mark Kettenis wrote: > > From: "Theo de Raadt" > > Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 10:19:51 -0600 > > > > Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > > > > That is my thought also. If this is impossible to use without setting > > > > an option, then noone will use it. If noone is using it, then why have > > > > the code at all? I think we want it, because we know we need it (soon). > > > > > > Actually xcall isn't an option; it is an attribute. Drivers that need > > > the functionality ask for it by adding it as a dependency. It is no > > > different than framebuffer drivers depending on rasops for example. > > > > > So the question really is whether we intend to use this functionality > > > in generic code or not. For now all the places where we intend to use > > > this are MD drivers. > > > > That is surprising. > > > > I was pretty sure the uses would either be in MD code only, or in > > MI /sys/kern /sys/net*, and /sys/uvm > > > > I would be very surprised to see it used in MI drivers. > > I said *MD* drivers, not MI drivers. Sigh, we are talking past each other. I believe it will be used in MI drivers and MI kernel. David, do you really intend for this to be only used in MD drivers?