[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: introduce XENFEAT_direct_mapped and XENFEAT_not_direct_mapped
- To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:41:12 -0400
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=tEz2JFMr1dvD5djeC9s6X8ftcCzTFEKLa21UzJKdQEQ=; b=VhtMwierE7FwOITZ8FbZzNmUlePLN2E2aCsvgFmVrmNfRjDNk/mIBoyRfflDAprrRNTKMRC1GfhW74TYTAljoWudXMqgK4gpN4c53MU6AG9TKl+LmKB1X7R8vnOlyjrowcQ56NUFj1dNJXu0VuhiwDAyE255m02RWvLgKLgwKcOuzdKAAPHIYwP6LujWEzcUSbTlOKIPEUzxNIOVOvutCvVr0ZTwBuONoUtu1Qw42XXMBELFP36hDcaRBpXaolh/7mFU3z00+bLGbNDOu14BojS2E+uqYbsVeODkhRzGLePSBAb4RcbmXKEgABW/xaoniXQwARJTsqSuvjkFLqvg4w==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=fnxzbWVbmuVq3vAEH+th2uIFsxbB9g9DCQ38W0fwR/fgMWYHQtzCzRXMdKLSRyqWJvKEn9gL+f6R6+RLhRwNhcIbXq2AjMbpG6UspIjDcBVNeouOWRqpDCoi3QoHyrhDpImw5sqbUGH4FSICRjQo7HITwYp7GbNub8f93ypOjsKoda8JwCiNo5yOnzJVMgvn2LqbLmzJ8uBCvr5wq7lRBePL/5MFQGm+phAEoh7cTjsz09zLI+DB5fClOCNeJNmwj1rbi6sjae/o8EZJcPMFu/EtT8GNBJHHFz45ymnZ6W3o0/5M3CkBpNLTizkdGmIYFoWC2GQ/Y6dRsHRYbKjaHA==
- Authentication-results: xilinx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;xilinx.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=oracle.com;
- Cc: jgross@xxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:41:31 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 3/19/21 1:53 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 3/18/21 7:28 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> So, I'll follow you suggestion, keep the x86 side named as it is today,
>>> and provide a tiny wrapper so that we can still have an arch-neutral
>>> xen_swiotlb_detect function (on x86 just calls pci_xen_swiotlb_detect.)
>>
>> But now on x86 side we end up with a routine that noone calls. And
>> pci_xen_swiotlb_detect() becomes not __init and so it will have to stick
>> around after boot for no good reason. (You could have made it __ref btw).
>>
>>
>> I think we should leave x86 alone. And if there is a declaration in
>> include/xen/swiotlb-xen.h that's only relevant to ARM --- well, so be it. Or
>> perhaps you can create arch/arm/include/asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h
> Yeah I wanted to avoid creating arch/arm/include/asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h
> because I would have to do one of the following:
>
> 1) add one more #include <asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h> to
> arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> (#include <xen/swiotlb-xen.h> is there already)
> 2) add #include <asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h> to include/xen/swiotlb-xen.h
>
> What's your preference? If I have to create
> arch/arm/include/asm/xen/swiotlb-xen.h, I would go with 2).
Yes, I agree --- #2 is the better choice.
-boris
|
