Re: [XEN][PATCH v8 09/19] xen/iommu: Move spin_lock from iommu_dt_device_is_assigned to caller

[Vikram Garhwal <vikram.garhwal@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 09:05:44AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.08.2023 02:39, Vikram Garhwal wrote:
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/xen/include/xen/iommu-private.h
> 
> I don't think private headers should live in include/xen/. Judging from only
> the patches I was Cc-ed on, ...
Thank you for suggestion. Do you where can i place it then?
Please see another comment down regarding who might be using this function.
> 
> > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> > +/*
> > + * xen/iommu-private.h
> > + */
> > +#ifndef __XEN_IOMMU_PRIVATE_H__
> > +#define __XEN_IOMMU_PRIVATE_H__
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_DEVICE_TREE
> > +#include <xen/device_tree.h>
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Checks if dt_device_node is assigned to a domain or not. This function
> > + * expects to be called with dtdevs_lock acquired by caller.
> > + */
> > +bool_t iommu_dt_device_is_assigned_locked(const struct dt_device_node 
> > *dev);
> > +#endif
> 
> ... I don't even see the need for the declaration, as the function is used
> only from the file also defining it. But of course if there is a use
> elsewhere (in Arm-only code, as is suggested by the description here), then
> the header (under a suitable name) wants to live under drivers/passthrough/
> (and of course be included only from anywhere in that sub-tree).
> 
This is also use in smmu.c:arm_smmu_dt_remove_device_legacy(). This is added in
12/19 patch(xen/smmu: Add remove_device callback for smmu_iommu ops).

I will make sure to cc you for all the patches in v9 series. I plan to send
it today.

> Jan