From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79A6DC433EF for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 394A660F9C for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 394A660F9C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.218465.378907 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mgNzX-0006jG-OB; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:03 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 218465.378907; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mgNzX-0006j9-Kf; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:03 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 218465; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:03 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mgNzX-0006j3-9s for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:03 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mgNzV-0007aQ-LL; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:01 +0000 Received: from gw1.octic.net ([81.187.162.82] helo=[10.0.1.193]) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mgNzV-00029G-Fp; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 09:16:01 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xen.org; s=20200302mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID; bh=TPpm9UiiMgGERDzbm3zLqKVBTKH1kmyaayZgZDaL3Go=; b=5L0Uz0rIBhe15hKKnJYFJu/8pi pC1eusv8M8mkjvnOKC2haijZj1NUTSY46WdytuWxlTSiH7/vJ/NuNllQBVVfGfMTHrCa35Qabbsrh Y9YG1tlsqIaWBJAKkCvDdVvTh3vHlfUV8+tnBPKmlROCg/6pVliQGcnWMKi3ACWE/ZPg=; Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:15:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers To: Ian Jackson Cc: Oleksandr Andrushchenko , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , "sstabellini@kernel.org" , Bertrand Marquis , Rahul Singh References: <20211027082533.1406015-1-andr2000@gmail.com> <65886734-7333-4469-fcc1-6916db708f13@xen.org> <6d8f1061-7aec-2c1a-aaf4-c30440c2797a@xen.org> <38da2edd-06a2-63d0-51ad-1284272c8da5@epam.com> <24954.51153.588540.850154@mariner.uk.xensource.com> From: Julien Grall In-Reply-To: <24954.51153.588540.850154@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Ian, On 28/10/2021 16:54, Ian Jackson wrote: > Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: fix SBDF calculation for vPCI MMIO handlers"): >> On 28/10/2021 16:27, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>> bridge as private and using info->gpa - GUEST_VPCI_ECAM_BASE... >>> So, I would stay with simpler >>> >>>     if ( bridge ) >>>        { >>>            sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa - bridge->cfg->phys_addr); >>>            sbdf.seg = bridge->segment; >>>        } >>>        else >>>            sbdf.sbdf = VPCI_ECAM_BDF(info->gpa - GUEST_VPCI_ECAM_BASE); >> >> I am fine with that so long this is part of an helper (maybe >> vpci_sbdf_from_addr()) rather than duplicated. > > There are a number of patches that I'm getting CC'd on related to ARM > and vpci (according to the Subject). Are these targeted for 4.16 ? > Most of them don't have 4.16 Subject tags. Oleksandr wants this patch to be included for 4.16 but forgot to tag it properly. Cheers, -- Julien Grall