[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] hw/xen: Set XenBackendInstance in the XenDevice before realizing it
On 22/11/2023 23:04, David Woodhouse wrote: On Wed, 2023-11-22 at 22:56 +0000, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@xxxxxxxxx> writes:On 21/11/2023 22:10, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:From: David Woodhouse <dwmw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> This allows a XenDevice implementation to know whether it was created by QEMU, or merely discovered in XenStore after the toolstack created it. This will allow us to create frontend/backend nodes only when we should, rather than unconditionally attempting to overwrite them from a driver domain which doesn't have privileges to do so. As an added benefit, it also means we no longer have to call the xen_backend_set_device() function from the device models immediately after calling qdev_realize_and_unref(). Even though we could make the argument that it's safe to do so, and the pointer to the unreffed device *will* actually still be valid, it still made my skin itch to look at it. Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- hw/block/xen-block.c | 3 +-- hw/char/xen_console.c | 2 +- hw/net/xen_nic.c | 2 +- hw/xen/xen-bus.c | 4 ++++ include/hw/xen/xen-backend.h | 2 -- include/hw/xen/xen-bus.h | 2 ++ 6 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)Actually, I think you should probably update xen_backend_try_device_destroy() in this patch too. It currently uses xen_backend_list_find() to check whether the specified XenDevice has an associated XenBackendInstance.Sure. Looks like it is the only user of xen_backend_list_find(), so we can get rid of it as well. I'll drop your R-b tag, because of those additional changes in the new version.I think it's fine to keep. He told me to do it :) I confirm that :-)
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |