Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V3 11/29] x86/hvm: Introduce a emulated VTD for HVM

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 20.10.17 at 04:46, <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:20:35PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 11:01:52PM -0400, Lan Tianyu wrote:
>>> From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> 
>>> This patch adds create/destroy function for the emulated VTD
>>> and adapts it to the common VIOMMU abstraction.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  
>>> -obj-y += iommu.o
>>>  obj-y += dmar.o
>>> -obj-y += utils.o
>>> -obj-y += qinval.o
>>>  obj-y += intremap.o
>>> +obj-y += iommu.o
>>> +obj-y += qinval.o
>>>  obj-y += quirks.o
>>> +obj-y += utils.o
>>
>>Why do you need to shuffle the list above?
> 
> I placed them in alphabetic order.

Which is appreciated. But this being non-essential for the patch, it
would avoid (valid) reviewer questions if you said in the description
this is an intended but non-essential change.

>>Also I'm not sure the Intel vIOMMU implementation should live here. As
>>you can see the path is:
>>
>>xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/
>>
>>The vIOMMU is not tied to passthrough at all, so I would rather place
>>it in:

Hmm, is vIOMMU usable without an actual backing IOMMU?

>>xen/drivers/vvtd/
>>
>>Or maybe you can create something like:
>>
>>xen/drivers/viommu/
>>
>>So that all vIOMMU implementations can share some code.
>>
> 
> vvtd and vtd use the same header files (i.g. vtd.h). That is why we put
> it there.  If that, we shoule move the related header files to a public
> directory.

And AMD (long ago) had placed their (still incomplete) virtual
implementation into the same directory as well. I.e. at this point
I'm not really opposed to the proposed placement here, albeit
I can see the point of Roger's argument.

Jan

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