From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [v7][PATCH 06/16] hvmloader/pci: skip reserved
	ranges
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 08:55:11 +0800
Message-ID: <55A5AF6F.1050305@intel.com>
References: <1436420047-25356-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<1436420047-25356-7-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<55A3D5600200007800090330@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<55A4AE88.2000200@intel.com>
	<55A4F2270200007800090834@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<55A4EA54.60708@intel.com>
	<55A5138F0200007800090A71@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <55A5138F0200007800090A71@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>> I agree we'd better overhaul this since we already found something
>> unreasonable here. But one or two weeks is really not enough to fix this
>> with a bitmap framework, and although a bitmap can make mmio allocation
>> better, but more complicated if we just want to allocate PCI mmio.
>>
>> So could we do this next? I just feel if you'd like to pay more time
>> help me refine our current solution, its relatively realistic to this
>> case :) And then we can go into bitmap in details or work out a better
>> solution in sufficient time slot.
>
> Looking at how long it took to get here (wasn't this series originally
> even meant to go into 4.5?) and how much time I already spent

Certainly appreciate your time.

I didn't mean its wasting time at this point. I just want to express 
that its hard to implement that solution in one or two weeks to walking 
into 4.6 as an exception.

Note I know this feature is still not accepted as an exception to 4.6 
right now so I'm making an assumption.

> reviewing all the previous versions, I don't see a point in wasting
> even more time on working out details of an approach that's getting
> too complex/ugly already anyway.

Here I'm trying to seek such a kind of two-steps approach if possible.

Thanks
Tiejun