From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] have architectures specify the number of
 PIRQs a hardware domain gets
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 12:07:10 +0000
Message-ID: <1418299630.10394.28.camel@citrix.com>
References: <5481C67D020000780004D2D1@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1417789634.22808.66.camel@eu.citrix.com>
	<5481D3D1020000780004D35F@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1417791061.22808.68.camel@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>) id 1Xz2WZ-00014R-Q2
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 12:07:15 +0000
In-Reply-To: <1417791061.22808.68.camel@eu.citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, IanJackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 14:51 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 14:48 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 05.12.14 at 15:27, <Ian.Campbell@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 13:51 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>  #define nr_static_irqs NR_IRQS
> > >> +#define arch_hwdom_irqs(domid) NR_IRQS
> > > 
> > > FWIW gic_number_lines() is the ARM equivalent of getting the number of
> > > GSIs.
> > > 
> > > *BUT* we don't actually use pirqs on ARM (everything goes via the
> > > virtualised interrupt controller). So maybe we should be setting
> > > nr_pirqs to 0 on ARM. I appreciate you likely want such a patch to come
> > > from an ARM person, so I'm fine with you making this NR_IRQS in the
> > > meantime.
> > 
> > Considering Julien also asking for this, I don't mind changing this to
> > zero for ARM. Just let me know which way I can get this ack-ed.
> 
> If you are happy to provide a version using zero and Julien wants to
> provide a tested-by then I'm fine with going that way.

Seems like things were more complex than Julien expected here, so I
think changing to zero would be a mistake at this point.

AIUI this patch results in no functional change for ARM, in that dom0
previously saw:
        d->nr_pirqs = nr_static_irqs + extra_dom0_irqs;
where nr_static_irqs == NR_IRQS on ARM where now it sees:

When extra_dom0_irqs > 0
        nr_static_irqs + extra_dom0_irqs
which is the same as before. Or when extra_dom0_irqs:
        arch_hwdom_irqs(domid);
==   NR_IRQS
==   nr_static_irqs + 0
i.e. no change.

Oh, actually extra_dom0_irqs has changed from a default of 256 to 0, I
don't think NR_IRQS(1024) + 256 made much sense on ARM (which is limited
to 1020 IRQs in h/w anyway), so I don't consider that a problem.

If that's all correct then: 
        Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>

Also Ack with my REST maintainer hat on for the general principal/common
code.

Ian.