[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [XEN PATCH v12 4/7] x86/domctl: Add hypercall to set the access of x86 gsi
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:44:00 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=amd.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=amd.com; dkim=pass header.d=amd.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=mz89nq9nGOP651vIzz0KZP5WlvOdOJYzzugb8MVDcRU=; b=PdfAzXZIAvM/h8IYBezKhUcq89UjIULq7C5pymK+utD1W1SCgik9GiKSFJC4OLNksl1YPCg+Dr6fvq92h581Q20ZUnReqDccGBFw5v7NRs5cga5sOe72RFSQpY5beQlLc07dNmiwQMVNnZfliK+MMNcCqIQNmZ+l5RBGPA7OqvKb/TC6DF9glhUcshE65sRqsSdeLG6HUemY9m5V0jKDEmzvrixeL8+zn8vjlJ49RHRaQ5iEqSdPV3ewQsUrk9EhQKD+DitzgPF3bEqngP6T+SIE2tWbVSzHjUlReIcsy8/cCAC48nCnLLXtOmPi01CUHZOxAVZqAGls9p77dNMXxA==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=YXsosKmaQDfo9SbN4MxzR8NSwVVFZlm/0mhhgXbmjpyIqU25R91i47QEoG+0PPbKhe6Gmqkj7Kd9X83/eIuAMmnUQ+zGIU/hm8sF72okXZLhL00xgv/4V6NZEl6tF45+KPCf7UZMDT1f0Ty4Uq/eHz7h4liq4Lb5xwVXOLpW+5OGb5ACf8XZmD8I89Z1gAL66CGEFWvxM1D5y1FkgCswrCbh6jdGw1MRkMFsfvuflgUA7AOSbVcAqAiea5JikOoFT2ux6gVmpSG5eK+4Gv6K+wklou2ReKW1i7SJCRKpa3AGn65PZtE4GPsid/RynD1n7RyeHhTSz5Xjbo8eznEa3Q==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=amd.com;
- Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <gwd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, "Daniel P . Smith" <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Hildebrand, Stewart" <Stewart.Hildebrand@xxxxxxx>, "Huang, Ray" <Ray.Huang@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 02 Aug 2024 07:44:07 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Thread-index: AQHa0SvYL4tONjoIyEuzfSK6fk2TK7ISY3CAgAGQQYD//7QaAIAAmwuA
- Thread-topic: [XEN PATCH v12 4/7] x86/domctl: Add hypercall to set the access of x86 gsi
On 2024/8/2 14:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 02.08.2024 05:10, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>> On 2024/8/1 19:06, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 07:41:21PM +0800, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
>>>> +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
>>>> @@ -464,6 +464,13 @@ struct xen_domctl_irq_permission {
>>>> uint8_t pad[3];
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> +/* XEN_DOMCTL_gsi_permission */
>>>> +struct xen_domctl_gsi_permission {
>>>> + uint32_t gsi;
>>>> +#define XEN_DOMCTL_GSI_PERMISSION_MASK 1
>>>
>>> IMO this would be better named GRANT or similar, maybe something like:
>>>
>>> /* Low bit used to signal grant/revoke action. */
>>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_GSI_REVOKE 0
>>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_GSI_GRANT 1
>>>
>>>> + uint8_t access_flag; /* flag to specify enable/disable of x86 gsi
>>>> access */
>>>> + uint8_t pad[3];
>>>
>>> We might as well declare the flags field as uint32_t and avoid the
>>> padding field.
>> So, should this struct be like below? Then I just need to check whether
>> everything except the lowest bit is 0.
>> struct xen_domctl_gsi_permission {
>> uint32_t gsi;
>> /* Lowest bit used to signal grant/revoke action. */
>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_GSI_REVOKE 0
>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_GSI_GRANT 1
>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_GSI_PERMISSION_MASK 1
>> uint32_t access_flag; /* flag to specify enable/disable of x86 gsi
>> access */
>> };
>
> Yet then why "access_flags"? You can't foresee what meaning the other bits may
> gain. That meaning may (and likely will) not be access related at all.
OK, just "uint32_t flags".
>
> Jan
--
Best regards,
Jiqian Chen.
|
