Re: [XEN PATCH v8 3/5] x86/pvh: Add PHYSDEVOP_setup_gsi for PVH dom0

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 17.05.2024 11:00, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/16 21:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hypercall.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hypercall.c
>>> @@ -76,6 +76,11 @@ long hvm_physdev_op(int cmd, 
>>> XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg)
>>>      case PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq:
>>>          break;
>>>  
>>> +    case PHYSDEVOP_setup_gsi:
>>> +        if ( !is_hardware_domain(currd) )
>>> +            return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> +        break;
>>> +
>>>      case PHYSDEVOP_eoi:
>>>      case PHYSDEVOP_irq_status_query:
>>>      case PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq:
>>
>> Below here we have a hardware-domain-only block already. Any reason not
>> to add to there? Yes, that uses -ENOSYS. Imo that wants changing anyway,
>> but even without that to me it would seem more consistent overall to have
>> the new case simply added there.
> Ah yes, I remembered you suggest me to use EOPNOTSUPP in v4, if change to 
> ENOSYS is also fine, I will move to below in next version.
> 
>>
>> Just to double check: Is there a respective Linux patch already (if so,
>> cross-linking the patches may be helpful)?
> Yes, my corresponding kernel patch:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240515065011.13797-1-Jiqian.Chen@xxxxxxx/T/#mc56b111562d7c67886da905e306f12b3ef8076b4
>  
> Do you mean I need to add this link into the commit message once the kernel 
> patch is accepted?

Not necessarily the commit message itself, but below the --- marker.
If the kernel patch was accepted earlier than the Xen one (which imo it
better shouldn't be), you'd likely want to move to pointing at the
resulting commit.

Jan