Re: [PATCH v3 21/52] xen: introduce CONFIG_HAS_PAGING_MEMPOOL

[Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan

On 2023/6/26 15:01, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 26.06.2023 05:34, Penny Zheng wrote:
> > --- a/xen/common/Kconfig
> > +++ b/xen/common/Kconfig
> > @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ config HAS_IOPORTS
> >   config HAS_KEXEC
> >         bool
> >   
> > +config HAS_PAGING_MEMPOOL
> > +       bool
> > +
> >   config HAS_PDX
> >         bool
> >   
> > --- a/xen/common/domctl.c
> > +++ b/xen/common/domctl.c
> > @@ -844,6 +844,7 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) 
> > u_domctl)
> >           ret = iommu_do_domctl(op, d, u_domctl);
> >           break;
> >   
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAS_PAGING_MEMPOOL
> >       case XEN_DOMCTL_get_paging_mempool_size:
> >           ret = arch_get_paging_mempool_size(d, &op->u.paging_mempool.size);
> >           if ( !ret )
> > @@ -857,6 +858,7 @@ long do_domctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t) 
> > u_domctl)
> >               ret = hypercall_create_continuation(
> >                   __HYPERVISOR_domctl, "h", u_domctl);
> >           break;
> > +#endif
> While I'm not outright opposed to doing it this way, I wonder
> whether it wouldn't be better to leave common code untouched by
> making arch_get_paging_mempool_size() do what you want done.
> That's part of what arch hooks are for, after all.
Sure, I'll try.

> Jan