Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

> On Thu, 14 May 2009 12:54:54 -0700
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Ingo,
> > 
> > Over the last week or so, I've set out pull requests for the following 
> > branches in git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git :
> > 
> > for-ingo/xen/dom0/core
> > 
> >     You made two comments about the first post of this set:
> > 
> >        1. The // comments in the mtrr code.  Now fixed.
> >        2. A query about when Xen can support PAT.  In progress; when its
> >           done, we can remove the unconditional PAT disable.
> > 
> > for-ingo/xen/dom0/pci
> > for-ingo/xen/dom0/swiotlb
> > 
> >     Updated with Joerg Roedel, FUJITA Tomonori and Matthew Wilcox's
> >     comments,  Acked-by and Reviewed-bys as appropriate.
> 
> The original code added dom0-specific dma mapping stuff in the 
> generic place, which is completely wrong. I asked you to move the 
> hacky stuff to Xen-specific code and ack'ed the patchset.
> 
> But as I said again and again, the dom0 changes to the generic dma 
> mapipng code is really ugly and I don't like them at all. I didn't 
> ack'ed such changes.

How should it be solved instead? Can you see a clean way to achieve 
it? (maybe you already explained it in past threads - if yes then 
have you got subject lines or URIs to that?)

Thanks,

	Ingo