Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] xen/vpci: Move ecam access functions to common code

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 10:13:24AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 15.10.2021 09:37, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> >> On 15 Oct 2021, at 07:29, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On 14.10.2021 19:09, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> >>>> On 14 Oct 2021, at 17:06, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> On 14.10.2021 16:49, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
> >>>>> @@ -305,7 +291,7 @@ static int vpci_portio_read(const struct 
> >>>>> hvm_io_handler *handler,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    reg = hvm_pci_decode_addr(cf8, addr, &sbdf);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -    if ( !vpci_access_allowed(reg, size) )
> >>>>> +    if ( !vpci_ecam_access_allowed(reg, size) )
> >>>>>        return X86EMUL_OKAY;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    *data = vpci_read(sbdf, reg, size);
> >>>>> @@ -335,7 +321,7 @@ static int vpci_portio_write(const struct 
> >>>>> hvm_io_handler *handler,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    reg = hvm_pci_decode_addr(cf8, addr, &sbdf);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -    if ( !vpci_access_allowed(reg, size) )
> >>>>> +    if ( !vpci_ecam_access_allowed(reg, size) )
> >>>>>        return X86EMUL_OKAY;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    vpci_write(sbdf, reg, size, data);
> >>>>
> >>>> Why would port I/O functions call an ECAM helper? And in how far is
> >>>> that helper actually ECAM-specific?
> >>>
> >>> The function was global before.
> >>
> >> I'm not objecting to the function being global, but to the "ecam" in
> >> its name.
> > 
> > Adding ecam in the name was a request from Roger.
> > This is just a consequence of this.
> 
> Roger - did you have in mind the uses here when asking for the addition
> of "ecam"?

I didn't realize it was also used by the IO ports accessors. Strictly
speaking 64bit accesses (lenght == 8) shouldn't be possible/allowed
from IO ports, but that's a red herring.

Thanks, Roger.