From: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <Jeremy.Fitzhardinge@citrix.com>,
Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@eu.citrix.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] xen/hybrid: Enable grant table and xenbus
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:17:40 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201002031317.40185.sheng@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1265134143.3247.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Wednesday 03 February 2010 02:09:03 Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 16:46 +0000, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > On Wednesday 03 February 2010 00:24:04 Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 13:24 +0000, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > > > I am not sure if I understand you right, but I think the issue is,
> > > > there is no PVonHVM drivers in Linux upstream. The drivers are
> > > > currently maintained by OSVs, and the one in Xen upstream code only
> > > > support 2.6.18. So I didn't take them into consideration at the time.
> > >
> > > True, but this is something which should be taken care of by the core
> > > Xen-aware code not something which should be pushed down into each
> > > driver.
> > >
> > > Someone who wants to add PVonHVM functionality shouldn't have to go and
> > > remove a bunch of conditionals from each driver (or worse add
> > > alternative clauses to each check!).
> > >
> > > > I think the "xen_evtchn_enable()" looks much better. Would replace
> > > > these ugly lines in the next version.
> > >
> > > I think it would be cleaner to encapsulate this in the evtchn code
> > > rather than leaking platform knowledge into each driver. IOW the evtchn
> > > functions should return failure if event channels are not enabled and
> > > the driver should cope with this gracefully.
> >
> > Agree. That what I suppose to do. What the drivers should only know is,
> > if event channel is enabled.
> >
> > > Or perhaps at the xenbus driver level we should be deciding whether or
> > > not we have enough paravirtualisation to be worth probing the drivers
> > > at all?
> >
> > I think current scheme is direct enough for now. We can improve it later.
>
> Taking a step back I don't think any of these checks are necessary at
> all -- in order to get as far as actually probing the devices xenbus
> needs to be up and running, which implies event channels, as well as
> everything else required for PV drivers to function, are working.
>
> Drivers for PCI devices don't all start with "if (pci_bus_available())",
> they just register the driver and let the kernel's driver core take care
> of things. If someone is worried about the overhead of an extra driver
> being registered, well that is what modular kernels are for.
>
> I think that even the existing "if (xen_domain())" check is unnecessary,
> at least in the frontend drivers.
Um, very reasonable. I would provide another patch for this.
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-03 5:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-02 8:19 (unknown), Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:19 ` [PATCH 1/6] xen/hybrid: add support for hvm_op Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:19 ` [PATCH 2/6] xen/hybrid: Import cpuid.h from Xen Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:19 ` [PATCH 3/6] xen/hybrid: Xen Hybrid Extension initialization Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:19 ` [PATCH 4/6] xen/hybrid: The entrance for Hybrid Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:19 ` [PATCH 5/6] xen/hybrid: Make event channel work with QEmu emulated devices Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:19 ` [PATCH 6/6] xen/hybrid: Enable grant table and xenbus Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 11:33 ` Ian Campbell
2010-02-02 13:24 ` Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 16:24 ` [Xen-devel] " Ian Campbell
2010-02-02 16:46 ` Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 18:09 ` [Xen-devel] " Ian Campbell
2010-02-03 5:17 ` Sheng Yang [this message]
2010-02-02 17:03 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2010-02-02 17:46 ` Sheng Yang
2010-02-02 8:26 ` [PATCH 0/6][v2] Hybrid extension for Xen guest Sheng Yang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201002031317.40185.sheng@linux.intel.com \
--to=sheng@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=Jeremy.Fitzhardinge@citrix.com \
--cc=Keir.Fraser@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).