[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] use of struct hvm_mirq_dpci_mapping.gmsi vs. HVM_IRQ_DPCI_*_MSI flags


  • To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Haitao Shan <maillists.shan@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 09:31:08 +0800
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Allen M Kay <allen.m.kay@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:32:10 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=CGk6p7hK7681tOzMY6mzBLWh1Mr8hPJfmcq3oO+nMCPLOMSMufOI9xK5lOc66dkrqA gObADbgwmw70whr+xIPMKMZFNNpZfdR93/CSM6xrnOI9shZT+1jRKwiKBcIPegmvD1oW zdelwe451bYtClhKj/hkJWcMu8z4GHPrXoa0g=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>


But clarification on the current (perhaps vs intended) use of
HVM_IRQ_DPCI_*_MSI would still be much appreciated (and if,
as suspected, there's need to clean this up, I'd like the cleanup
to be done before the patches I have pending).

Jan, I think the meaning of the flags are pretty straight forward. But I agree with you, we need to clean this up. I don't believe all the flags are necessary at the moment (given the fact that they are introduced by host-MSI-to-guest-INTx translation). But it is still OK for me if they did not cause trouble and were not wrongly used.
I wonder whether the original patch has carefully considered the usage of these flags when it tried to introduce these flags by nature.
 
Basically, I think it is up to you to decide their (flags) future. You are already very careful on this. :) 
 
Shan Haitao 
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.