Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 09/21] xen/arm: Release IRQ routed to a domain when it's destroying

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 08/07/2014 05:31 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2014, Julien Grall wrote:
>> On 08/07/2014 04:36 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>> But I doubt we will have PPIs in future, there is more issues to handle
>>>> (such as the number of VCPUs doesn't match the number of physical CPUs).
>>>
>>> In that case, why not call the two functions release_guest_spi and
>>> gic_remove_spi_from_guest?
>>
>> Because the 2 functions to route the irq are called route_irq_to_guest
>> and gic_route_irq_to_guest.
> 
> I would prefer to avoid introducing more functions that look like they
> can handle any irqs but actually they cannot by design.

That why Xen checks the IRQ number at the beginning of route_irq_to_guest.

> I would be OK with the asymmetry in function names. We could also turn
> route_irq_to_guest into route_spi_to_guest and gic_route_irq_to_guest
> into gic_route_spi_to_guest.

Those functions will be used for MSI sooner or later. I would prefer to
keep the current name and add an ASSERT.

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel