Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server

From: "Yu, Zhang" <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	"Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>,
	Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xen.org>,
	George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
	"zhiyuan.lv@intel.com" <zhiyuan.lv@intel.com>,
	"jun.nakajima@intel.com" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 19:38:48 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <571618C8.7070603@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2aca9f74ae6741eebd94fc9923b75fe5@AMSPEX02CL03.citrite.net>

On 4/19/2016 7:15 PM, Paul Durrant wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Yu, Zhang [mailto:yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com]
>> Sent: 19 April 2016 12:03
>> To: Paul Durrant; Jan Beulich; Wei Liu
>> Cc: Kevin Tian; Keir (Xen.org); Andrew Cooper; Tim (Xen.org); George
>> Dunlap; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; zhiyuan.lv@intel.com;
>> jun.nakajima@intel.com
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename
>> p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/19/2016 12:58 AM, Paul Durrant wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of
>> Jan
>>>> Beulich
>>>> Sent: 18 April 2016 17:47
>>>> To: Paul Durrant
>>>> Cc: Kevin Tian; Keir (Xen.org); Andrew Cooper; Tim (Xen.org); George
>>>> Dunlap; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com;
>>>> zhiyuan.lv@intel.com; jun.nakajima@intel.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/ioreq server: Rename
>>>> p2m_mmio_write_dm to p2m_ioreq_server
>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com> 04/18/16 6:45 PM >>>
>>>>> The original patch was posted before the cut-off IIRC so I'm not sure
>>>>> of the policy regarding freeze-exceptions.
>>>>
>>>>     It was submitted before the feature freeze, yes, but didn't make it in by
>>>> code freeze. So it's my understanding that an exception would be
>> needed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok. Thanks for the clarification. IMO getting this in is worth the freeze
>> exception... it's a shame p2m_mmio_write_dm made it into 4.6.1. It needs to
>> go before it proliferates any further.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, Paul.
>>
>> So I suppose the only place we need change for this patch is
>> for hvmmem_type_t, which should be defined like this?
>>
>> typedef enum {
>>       HVMMEM_ram_rw,             /* Normal read/write guest RAM */
>>       HVMMEM_ram_ro,             /* Read-only; writes are discarded */
>>       HVMMEM_mmio_dm,            /* Reads and write go to the device model */
>> #if __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__ >= 0x00040700
>>       HVMMEM_ioreq_server
>> #else
>>       HVMMEM_mmio_write_dm
>> #endif
>> } hvmmem_type_t;
>>
>> Besides, does 4.7 still accept freeze exception? It would be great
>> if we can get an approval for this.
>
> I talked to Wei earlier and he is happy to give a freeze exception to this change.
>

Great! I really obliged. :)
BTW, Does some form of application need to be submitted? I'm not
familiar with the procedure.

Yu
>    Paul
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Yu
>>
>>>     Paul
>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>>> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
>>>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
>>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>>>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel