[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 6/7] xen/arm: introduce gic callbacks
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 13:04 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 12:57 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 16:37 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Introduce callbacks to receive notifications from the GIC when a > > > > specific IRQ has been EOI'd by the guest. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > xen/arch/arm/gic.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > > > > xen/arch/arm/setup.c | 1 + > > > > xen/include/asm-arm/gic.h | 5 +++++ > > > > 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c > > > > index 1c8219d..0ecc0f1 100644 > > > > --- a/xen/arch/arm/gic.c > > > > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/gic.c > > > > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ static struct { > > > > static irq_desc_t irq_desc[NR_IRQS]; > > > > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(irq_desc_t[NR_LOCAL_IRQS], local_irq_desc); > > > > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(uint64_t, lr_mask); > > > > +static gic_callback_fn_t gic_callbacks[NR_IRQS]; > > > > > > I think this should rather go in struct arch_irq_desc. > > > > Actually, aren't these *virtual* interrupt callbacks? > > > > It is possible that IRQ30 for one guest might not have the same use as > > IRQ30 in another, which suggests that this belongs in some domain > > specific location, like struct pending_irq. > > Did we end up not needing this patch? Correct _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |