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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDAE3C433E3 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B165207DF for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="saPe2SMH"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="OlmbOjhD" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729562AbgHYJwC (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2020 05:52:02 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45674 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728377AbgHYJwB (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2020 05:52:01 -0400 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5E4AC061574; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 02:52:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1598349119; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qi88rJ2mAeMyhee0eT9kDZfffU9Q0nWkBLlAEntSw8w=; b=saPe2SMHs4fxaHPtIfmZINCVtmade/IUdScDTrTE56bKhbWhWWPmlrhyuwQwbPnFdv02n1 qRKHY6+Fao2onQFOAz/d63P6+2VnSYMbUC+pcft0s0SMwT2vV9us/1npGja2X+2tYSpscB iPJsYuS2FMf/1nMuwC8vtsuYf/y0bjbBwKrk2/0oTU5egQm1Ek/7EUMyQDShnlbtAcdbLe JE09lOMIrym7gVQeJa9rILtA3RsQfKKlIKniu0Z45R81ceeja+uMDPulnSnTEjTA49o3W7 SMaqJJyWq0AnhRrTNSiWKeKyPcK0S21cZa7G3cB+Y0b9eRpBKdLEAoz+GdDGSg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1598349119; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qi88rJ2mAeMyhee0eT9kDZfffU9Q0nWkBLlAEntSw8w=; b=OlmbOjhDdhkNmF8xd3M7JINOojGOBGj4UhpScwvT1dHOdNPkfP2dB8Acep6NLHMEEgMoKl YoToi1lJLBSp6rDQ== To: =?utf-8?B?SsO8cmdlbiBHcm/Dnw==?= , LKML Cc: x86@kernel.org, Joerg Roedel , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, Haiyang Zhang , Jon Derrick , Lu Baolu , Wei Liu , "K. Y. Srinivasan" , Stephen Hemminger , Steve Wahl , Dimitri Sivanich , Russ Anderson , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Boris Ostrovsky , Stefano Stabellini , Marc Zyngier , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Megha Dey , Jason Gunthorpe , Dave Jiang , Alex Williamson , Jacob Pan , Baolu Lu , Kevin Tian , Dan Williams Subject: Re: [patch RFC 24/38] x86/xen: Consolidate XEN-MSI init In-Reply-To: References: <20200821002424.119492231@linutronix.de> <20200821002947.667887608@linutronix.de> <5caec213-8f56-9f12-34db-a29de8326f95@suse.com> <87tuwr68q8.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:51:58 +0200 Message-ID: <87d03f59z5.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 25 2020 at 06:21, J=C3=BCrgen Gro=C3=9F wrote: > On 24.08.20 23:21, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> I still think it does the right thing depending on the place it is >> called from, but even if so, it's completely unreadable gunk. I'll fix >> that proper. > > The main issue is that xen_initial_domain() and xen_pv_domain() are > orthogonal to each other. So xen_initial_domain() can either be true > for xen_pv_domain() (the "classic" pv dom0) or for xen_hvm_domain() > (the new PVH dom0). Fair enough. My limited XENology striked again.