Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 08/10] iommu: Split iommu_hwdom_init() into arch specific parts

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 17.05.17 at 22:30, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/17/2017 07:51 PM, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Well, if the ARM maintainers insist on baking their own thing every
>>> time we'd use the M2P if it was there, I think I can't reasonably
>>> block this patch. Otoh I'd prefer to not see the non-x86-specific
>>> code move to x86/, so perhaps the whole patch wants
>>> re-structuring using either a manifest definition in the ARM headers
>>> or e.g. CONFIG_M2P (which x86 would select, but ARM wouldn't).
>> Jan, I am afraid but I didn't get what you meant here:
>> "manifest definition in the ARM headers"
> 
> I think he meant to have either a define in the header mentioning the 
> absence/presence of M2P.

Yes, at least in a way.

> But my preference would be using the Kconfig here.

Depends on the symbol used: If such a symbol solely _indicates_
the presence, Kconfig would be better indeed. If, however, the
symbol is e.g. a macro resolving to a per-arch implementation,
with common code providing a default definition when the arch
doesn't provide any, then the non-Kconfig variant may be
preferable.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel