From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@kernel.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>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/16]: PVH xen: Add PHYSDEVOP_map_iomem
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:43:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130128164337.GD7223@konrad-lan.dumpdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301281513230.10432@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-28 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-12 1:32 [RFC PATCH 3/16]: PVH xen: Add PHYSDEVOP_map_iomem Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-14 11:23 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-15 23:35 ` Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-16 9:45 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-24 2:12 ` Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-24 9:23 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-25 1:53 ` Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-25 8:05 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-26 2:23 ` Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-26 3:04 ` Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-28 15:13 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-01-28 16:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [this message]
2013-01-28 16:47 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-28 16:50 ` Ian Campbell
2013-01-28 10:55 ` Ian Campbell
2013-01-24 15:06 ` Tim Deegan
2013-01-25 1:03 ` Mukesh Rathor
2013-01-28 16:39 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-01-28 16:47 ` Jan Beulich
2013-01-30 21:24 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
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=20130128164337.GD7223@konrad-lan.dumpdata.com \
--to=konrad@kernel.org \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/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).