[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM][PATCH 01/10] pci/pvh: Allow PCI toolstack code run with PVH domains on ARM
- To: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:10:01 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=epam.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=epam.com; dkim=pass header.d=epam.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=mIDlB9PJGPtCwbyk43lUH/M8WeJL4oZx74brkwSsy7s=; b=Mqp1Db4p0wBO8BIxb4hqCt0Jf+9BUYVgE6h1K6jDjYelbs3wyXkwP/pSmnvTBVvT1FeuEpqyuVAbLTeoAEh/1ix6FuU/cUAuje4+rDnj0Q1Ez7NNTAmFQdFSPpG3FcwZ27QzSZnIWgRnX0u8zFlAml/azfYX8CXu+E8saiI2zaczNJ+rBjmEjrx18AdiHk2wknUo8i99bvB9fIZWJRvIWR6l1frFvHEWr7qalOkeeLESfd9C78t4DuM+CYLX/JBb0rJOk52U/9SGhTWAWtFot1arC+XhX7hHPmWB1e57JNUO327KqTNS1IKc5EV6HxBzMEWF6hSRbm97Zh7zh/bLcw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=bdKxhatwjQbcs4qJUfqhmBwy1QdRQvXCiAgEvYD2t9qumg9x5SU8odIB0DWwpX0z19rIKJwWBVrS7KGaXeZuSytBQTWwTgQvenVXAF+65fWl7EeaK25ESuVJNIQJAXz2EK3o/dbMTO2kjdaUc0GnATisQYy8nFGWPhv8hQHlefa4ftgZIFV1bJPnKrAueWfDxyUQ0mJStFBBT5h2NfuhhpHPzwc4nPuG8ddnziWRb/UfR75ebBRHlSHer9smPWFp0qGWSJzhf8gER7a284hes9aDTKL9NpTBQvhDRRdVekOO1uA8bp2UR5WUX772XoKuS76RyppSFjNJM2SXcBoPdg==
- Authentication-results: citrix.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;citrix.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=epam.com;
- Cc: "Rahul.Singh@xxxxxxx" <Rahul.Singh@xxxxxxx>, "Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx" <Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>, "julien.grall@xxxxxxx" <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>, "jbeulich@xxxxxxxx" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, "sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx" <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "wl@xxxxxxx" <wl@xxxxxxx>, Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:10:13 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Thread-index: AQHWtpbtW65RafIiXE60uDMyi8KYhqnC4BMAgAAKqgA=
- Thread-topic: [SUSPECTED SPAM][PATCH 01/10] pci/pvh: Allow PCI toolstack code run with PVH domains on ARM
On 11/11/20 2:31 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:50:22PM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
>>
>> According to https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Linux_PVH:
>>
>> Items not supported by PVH
>> - PCI pass through (as of Xen 4.10)
>>
>> Allow running PCI remove code on ARM and do not assert for PVH domains.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@xxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> tools/libxl/Makefile | 4 ++++
>> tools/libxl/libxl_pci.c | 4 +++-
>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/Makefile b/tools/libxl/Makefile
>> index 241da7fff6f4..f3806aafcb4e 100644
>> --- a/tools/libxl/Makefile
>> +++ b/tools/libxl/Makefile
>> @@ -130,6 +130,10 @@ endif
>>
>> LIBXL_LIBS += -lyajl
>>
>> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARM),y)
>> +CFALGS += -DCONFIG_ARM
>> +endif
>> +
>> LIBXL_OBJS = flexarray.o libxl.o libxl_create.o libxl_dm.o libxl_pci.o \
>> libxl_dom.o libxl_exec.o libxl_xshelp.o libxl_device.o \
>> libxl_internal.o libxl_utils.o libxl_uuid.o \
>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_pci.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_pci.c
>> index bc5843b13701..b93cf976642b 100644
>> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_pci.c
>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_pci.c
>> @@ -1915,8 +1915,10 @@ static void do_pci_remove(libxl__egc *egc, uint32_t
>> domid,
>> goto out_fail;
>> }
>> } else {
>> + /* PCI passthrough can also run on ARM PVH */
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_ARM
>> assert(type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV);
>> -
>> +#endif
> I would just remove the assert now if this is to be used by Arm and
> you don't need to fork the file for Arm.
Sounds good, I will drop then
But what would be the right explanation then? I mean why there was an ASSERT
and now it is safe (for x86) to remove that?
>
> Roger.
Thank you,
Oleksandr
|
