From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 15/22] xen/arm: ITS: implement hw_irq_controller for LPIs Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 11:11:59 +0100 Message-ID: <55C332EF.8000505@citrix.com> References: <1437995524-19772-1-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com> <1437995524-19772-16-git-send-email-vijay.kilari@gmail.com> <55C0C1E8.10407@citrix.com> <55C3314E.3040304@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55C3314E.3040304@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Vijay Kilari Cc: Ian Campbell , Stefano Stabellini , Prasun Kapoor , manish.jaggi@caviumnetworks.com, Tim Deegan , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Stefano Stabellini , Vijaya Kumar K List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 06/08/15 11:05, Julien Grall wrote: >> But Ian suggested to export gicv3_host_irq_end instead of calling >> gicv3_eoi_irq() > > And Ian said "Exposing those two gicv3 functions is a bit unfortunate, > but I think it will do for now.". > > Which means he was opposed to the previous solution. *he wasn't opposed. > > Anyway, I think it's a fair trade compare to the overhead you had for > everytime you received an IRQ used by Xen. This is more true given that > we don't even support LPI for Xen... > > Regards, > -- Julien Grall