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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E40D2C4363D for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:28 +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 85C3F21D20 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=xen.org header.i=@xen.org header.b="JayBn9Dt" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 85C3F21D20 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kLUSf-0002VW-FK; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:13 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kLUSd-0002VR-Mz for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:11 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: b64e8056-afcd-4a41-bbc3-de1fdac51a40 Received: from mail.xenproject.org (unknown [104.130.215.37]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id b64e8056-afcd-4a41-bbc3-de1fdac51a40; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:10 +0000 (UTC) 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: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject; bh=dLHwdDKiHh8vx3Natl3AOSdPKw9JSuLQyLa1etXnhU4=; b=JayBn9DtOx6zV4hDgdwdguulL4 8e6CsjuoUoshPm4LhFwwLGqIfquzBwhPlox7oUPW/CYbktfZ+zabtFe8ptirz7zHSH8p8meLW9nHL 0ccbWP47mV8mwJuyPM6wiZQGWec4BK6PVpKfMJ6aup4j5DHk/elKcb1PASiIr3uKOLKU=; Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kLUSa-0003WH-HS; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:08 +0000 Received: from [54.239.6.186] (helo=a483e7b01a66.ant.amazon.com) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kLUSa-0007WN-7p; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:51:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 09/16] arm/ioreq: Introduce arch specific bits for IOREQ/DM features To: Jan Beulich , Oleksandr Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Oleksandr Tyshchenko , Stefano Stabellini , Volodymyr Babchuk , Julien Grall References: <1599769330-17656-1-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com> <1599769330-17656-10-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com> <7fbab25d-18a9-83d6-2596-f0f9d149058c@gmail.com> From: Julien Grall Message-ID: <21522443-7c3b-ced1-653b-1021edd55107@xen.org> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 17:51:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 24/09/2020 12:08, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 23.09.2020 22:16, Oleksandr wrote: >> On 23.09.20 21:03, Julien Grall wrote: >>> On 10/09/2020 21:22, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote: >>>> From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko >>>> @@ -91,6 +108,28 @@ struct arch_domain >>>>   #endif >>>>   }  __cacheline_aligned; >>>>   +enum hvm_io_completion { >>>> +    HVMIO_no_completion, >>>> +    HVMIO_mmio_completion, >>>> +    HVMIO_pio_completion >>>> +}; >>>> + >>>> +struct hvm_vcpu_io { >>>> +    /* I/O request in flight to device model. */ >>>> +    enum hvm_io_completion io_completion; >>>> +    ioreq_t                io_req; >>>> + >>>> +    /* >>>> +     * HVM emulation: >>>> +     *  Linear address @mmio_gla maps to MMIO physical frame >>>> @mmio_gpfn. >>>> +     *  The latter is known to be an MMIO frame (not RAM). >>>> +     *  This translation is only valid for accesses as per >>>> @mmio_access. >>>> +     */ >>>> +    struct npfec        mmio_access; >>>> +    unsigned long       mmio_gla; >>>> +    unsigned long       mmio_gpfn; >>>> +}; >>>> + >>> >>> Why do we need to re-define most of this? Can't this just be in common >>> code? >> >> Jan asked almost the similar question in "[PATCH V1 02/16] xen/ioreq: >> Make x86's IOREQ feature common". >> Please see my answer there: >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11769105/#23637511 >> >> Theoretically we could move this to the common code, but the question is >> how to be with other struct fields the x86's struct hvm_vcpu_io >> has/needs but >> Arm's seems not, would it be possible to logically split struct >> hvm_vcpu_io into common and arch parts? > > Have struct vcpu_io and struct arch_vcpu_io as a sub-part of it? +1 for the idea. Cheers, -- Julien Grall