From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/16]: PVH xen: Add PHYSDEVOP_map_iomem
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:43:38 -0500
Message-ID: <20130128164337.GD7223@konrad-lan.dumpdata.com>
References: <50F3F8CE02000078000B53E6@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<20130115153538.7b82b284@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<50F684B302000078000B612B@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<20130123181223.186f5c28@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<51010BA502000078000B9031@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<20130124175327.1266b156@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<51024AE402000078000B9792@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<20130125182349.1e666ec1@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<20130125190422.4f56cc59@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1301281513230.10432@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301281513230.10432@kaball.uk.xensource.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: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:13:48PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2013, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:23:49 -0800
> > Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:05:40 +0000
> > > "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > >>> On 25.01.13 at 02:53, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > Since this happens once during boot, I am ok either way. Staying
> > > > > with what I've keeps linux code clean and also provides flexibily
> > > > > for future in case. But if you feel strongly, I can special case
> > > > > dom0 in linux to assume xen has it all mapped, and generate a
> > > > > patch there. Please lmk.
> > > > 
> > > > Hmm, special casing Dom0 isn't what I'm after. I want this to be
> > > > transparent to the kernel in all cases (keeps the Linux code even
> > > > cleaner).
> > > 
> > > Ok. I am looking into it. Stefano, Ian, any comments? You guys OK with
> > > that approach? I probably won't need PHYSDEVOP_map_iomem then.
> > 
> > Forgot to cc stefano and Ian. Resending CCing them.
> 
> Yeah, it looks like a reasonable approach.

That would mean that the PVH domU with PCI devices would have do this
as well. Usually this is done in the toolstack - so would this mean that
the PHYSDEVOP_map_iomem would be used there? Or would it be just part
of the XEN_DOMCTL_iomem_permission?