From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/17] xen/arm: ITS: Add virtual ITS
	driver
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 10:27:00 +0100
Message-ID: <1436779620.7019.49.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1436514172-3263-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
	<1436514172-3263-7-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
	<1436536453.10074.33.camel@citrix.com>
	<CALicx6sPDXHPSkMx7hq_ndusubvR1qJ81mgLZUucFWyjqxA+ww@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <CALicx6sPDXHPSkMx7hq_ndusubvR1qJ81mgLZUucFWyjqxA+ww@mail.gmail.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: Vijay Kilari <vijay.kilari@gmail.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Prasun Kapoor <Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com>, Vijaya Kumar K <vijaya.kumar@caviumnetworks.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, manish.jaggi@caviumnetworks.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Sat, 2015-07-11 at 20:18 +0530, Vijay Kilari wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> 
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-07-10 at 13:12 +0530, vijay.kilari@gmail.com wrote:
> >> +/* RB-tree helpers for vits_device attached to a domain */
> >
> > In the rest of the series I found this used in three places:
> >       * On assignment, to insert the device into the tree
> >       * On deassignment, to remove it again
> >       * In vgic_vcpu_inject_lpi, where the device is looked up and then
> >         never used.
> >
> > I don't see any other use and therefore I don't think this RB tree
> > serves any purpose, which is consistent with the design which doesn't
> > require this lookup anywhere. Please remove it.
> >
> > If there is some use of it in some future series (e.g. perhaps the PCI
> > one) then please still remove it and add a patch to that series to
> > introduce it.
> >
> 
> You mean for now we will remove RB-tree for managing devices assigned
> to domain

Yes, it isn't needed for ITS at all AFAICT and having it around has just
tempted you into using it incorrectly during vpli injection.

>  and introduce RB-tree and do look up when pci-passthrough is
> introduced?.

If it is needed then yes.

Ian.