[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8a8a853c-cbe6-b19c-f6ba-c8cdeda84a36@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 11:46:10 -0700
From: "Dey, Megha" <megha.dey@...el.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"alex.williamson@...hat.com" <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, "Lu, Baolu" <baolu.lu@...el.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
"Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Lin, Jing" <jing.lin@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"kwankhede@...dia.com" <kwankhede@...dia.com>,
"eric.auger@...hat.com" <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"netanelg@...lanox.com" <netanelg@...lanox.com>,
"shahafs@...lanox.com" <shahafs@...lanox.com>,
"yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com" <yan.y.zhao@...ux.intel.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Ortiz, Samuel" <samuel.ortiz@...el.com>,
"Hossain, Mona" <mona.hossain@...el.com>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 02/18] irq/dev-msi: Add support for a new DEV_MSI
irq domain
Hi Thomas,
On 8/11/2020 2:53 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
>
> CC+: XEN folks
>
>> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
>>> The infrastructure itself is not more than a thin wrapper around the
>>> existing msi domain infrastructure and might even share code with
>>> platform-msi.
>> And the annoying fact that you need XEN support which opens another can
>> of worms...
hmm I am not sure why we need Xen support... are you referring to idxd
using xen?
> which needs some real cleanup first.
>
> x86 still does not associate the irq domain to devices at device
> discovery time, i.e. the device::msi_domain pointer is never populated.
>
> So to support this new fangled device MSI stuff we'd need yet more
> x86/xen specific arch_*msi_irqs() indirection and hackery, which is not
> going to happen.
>
> The right thing to do is to convert XEN MSI support over to proper irq
> domains. This allows to populate device::msi_domain which makes a lot of
> things simpler and also more consistent.
do you think this cleanup is to be a precursor to my patches? I could
look into it but I am not familiar with the background of Xen
and this stuff. Can you please provide further guidance on where to look?
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists