[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] public/hvm: Export the HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_VIA ABI in the API
On 24/11/15 09:56, Paul Durrant wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel- >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich >> Sent: 24 November 2015 07:33 >> To: Andrew Cooper >> Cc: Keir (Xen.org); Ian Campbell; Tim (Xen.org); Ian Jackson; Xen-devel; >> Stefano Stabellini; Shannon Zhao >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] public/hvm: Export the >> HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_VIA ABI in the API >> >>>>> On 20.11.15 at 19:20, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> --- a/xen/include/public/hvm/params.h >>> +++ b/xen/include/public/hvm/params.h >>> @@ -29,18 +29,21 @@ >>> * Parameter space for HVMOP_{set,get}_param. >>> */ >>> >>> +#define HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_IRQ 0 >>> + >>> /* >>> * How should CPU0 event-channel notifications be delivered? >>> - * val[63:56] == 0: val[55:0] is a delivery GSI (Global System Interrupt). >>> - * val[63:56] == 1: val[55:0] is a delivery PCI INTx line, as follows: >>> - * Domain = val[47:32], Bus = val[31:16], >>> - * DevFn = val[15: 8], IntX = val[ 1: 0] >>> - * val[63:56] == 2: val[7:0] is a vector number, check for >>> - * XENFEAT_hvm_callback_vector to know if this delivery >>> - * method is available. >>> + * >>> * If val == 0 then CPU0 event-channel notifications are not delivered. >>> + * If val != 0, val[63:56] encodes the type, as follows: >>> */ >>> -#define HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_IRQ 0 >>> +#define HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_TYPE_GSI 0 /* val[55:0] is a delivery >> GSI */ >>> +#define HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_TYPE_PCI_INTX 1 /* val[55:0] is a >> delivery PCI INTx line: >>> + Domain = val[47:32], Bus = >>> val[31:16], >>> + DevFn = val[15: 8], IntX = >>> val[ 1: 0] */ >>> +#define HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_TYPE_VECTOR 2 /* val[7:0] is a vector >> number, check for >>> + XENFEAT_hvm_callback_vector >>> to know if >>> + this delivery method is >>> available. */ >> Would you not think that while cleaning this up, doing some >> re-formatting would also help? I.e. Putting the comments on lines of >> their own instead of at the end (even more deeply indented than >> they were before)? Also the first two of these last three comments >> are missing full stops. >> >> Also considering >> >> * Attempting to use GSI 0 will actually disable callbacks >> >> in your patch comments, I'd suggest extending the GSI comment to >> state that it has to be a non-zero one. >> > Could we also perhaps deprecate this whole mechanism at this point? I added > HVMOP_set_evtchn_upcall_vector quite a while ago now. January, so Xen 4.6 is the only release with this hvmop in. The issue with deprecating HVM_PARAM_CALLBACK_IRQ is that DMLite has no LAPIC, so can't use HVMOP_set_evtchn_upcall_vector. Much as this ABI is horrible and nasty (and really should be deprecated), there are not alternatives which cover the common uses. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |