From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98006C87FCA for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.1058474.1426031 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ufOyv-0003HU-Sn; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:29 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 1058474.1426031; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ufOyv-0003HN-Q6; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:29 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 1058474; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:29 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ufOyv-0003HH-3G for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:29 +0000 Received: from mail-24416.protonmail.ch (mail-24416.protonmail.ch [109.224.244.16]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 7b3b4c65-6995-11f0-b895-0df219b8e170; Fri, 25 Jul 2025 22:25:18 +0200 (CEST) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 7b3b4c65-6995-11f0-b895-0df219b8e170 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=proton.me; s=protonmail; t=1753475117; x=1753734317; bh=3h+U2v9pXCWbMlFI6/Gro1AgPy7z+cSiltEdtaLqAP0=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=DstpRAOpw/MMqqgGdv8kSdpxSTuJ/S7UwjK3RlL1IdAoI3B5cQ7bqi5YUGIW61Y0L Eg4hLpL9v0sVjn81vfTCleCsOGyFMNmxd2ytn9v4TqW4No78DkuiASx+igFVK5Cwsk 1nUnmA5qrQmh/avrpr4md9G7nMkrYC7s2uU3NwlIPzRxNvITfb+n9ywYIw4RY5RgnE 69ObEGYTwVtTuyN65J0zwcXyy2JuHi3mZRG3hD4I7uMMDUT3JOO6WMlDNG3Tz6RGsz kOJQCjZRlFd+h7HctssHecDUVYGhi8b1lR6D5WaSEnFRpRDkfYSY+sggERU9MavY8a FwmFsUFNyN51A== Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:25:12 +0000 To: Jan Beulich From: dmkhn@proton.me Cc: Stewart Hildebrand , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Andrew Cooper , Anthony PERARD , Michal Orzel , Julien Grall , =?utf-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= , Stefano Stabellini Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vpci: allow queueing of mapping operations Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20250723163744.13095-1-stewart.hildebrand@amd.com> <20250723163744.13095-2-stewart.hildebrand@amd.com> Feedback-ID: 123220910:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 1f2d2b7ab52bc0fe514eb85549abf6d1cb57e7e7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 09:47:24AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 24.07.2025 05:42, dmkhn@proton.me wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 03:00:46AM +0000, dmkhn@proton.me wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 12:37:41PM -0400, Stewart Hildebrand wrote: > >>> Introduce vPCI BAR mapping task queue. Decouple map operation state f= rom > >>> general vPCI state: in particular, move the per-BAR rangeset out of > >>> struct vpci and into the map task struct. > >>> > >>> This is preparatory work for further changes that need to perform > >>> multiple unmap/map operations before returning to guest. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Stewart Hildebrand > >>> --- > >>> v1->v2: > >>> * new patch > >>> > >>> Related: 622bdd962822 ("vpci/header: handle p2m range sets per BAR") > >>> --- > >>> xen/common/domain.c | 4 + > >>> xen/drivers/vpci/header.c | 197 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------= -- > >>> xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c | 3 - > >>> xen/include/xen/vpci.h | 16 +++- > >>> 4 files changed, 139 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-) >=20 > Why did I (and many others) end up on the To: list of this reply? (Breaks= my Apologies for that, I might missed something when sending the email out. > rules of sorting incoming mail into appropriate folders, for context.) Al= so, > please trim reply context suitably. Without you doing so, every single re= ader > will need to scroll through the entirety of a long mail just to find (in = this > case) a single line of reply (somewhere in the middle). Of course you > shouldn't be too agressive with trimming, to retain proper context for yo= ur > reply. Ack. >=20 > Jan