From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [v7][PATCH 03/16] xen/passthrough: extend hypercall
 to support rdm reservation policy
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 14:37:48 +0800
Message-ID: <55A35CBC.1090901@intel.com>
References: <1436420047-25356-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<1436420047-25356-4-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<CAFLBxZbZkS3ZRyTC-g07MYNCDDm4Tb3rCB2oJRzx3qVHxxEvPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<559FFA6C020000780008F998@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<559FDFC0.7000609@eu.citrix.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: <559FDFC0.7000609@eu.citrix.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: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

> I was saying two things in the above paragraph:
>
> 1. For removal, there's no point in passing in anything other than '0'
> for flags, since it's ignored.  Passing a non-0 value implies that the
> flags will have some effect, which is misleading.
>
> 2. For places we know we're adding to hw domains, I think it makes most
> sense also to pass in '0', to imply STRICT.
>
> But if instead they insist on passing RELAXED, then please add an
> ASSERT(pdev->domain == hw_domain) or something of the kind to
> intel_iommu_add_device().  (If defaulting to STRICT, I don't think the
> ASSERT is necessary anymore.)
>

I agree and also looks Jan didn't oppose this STRICT way by setting "0" 
directly, so lets do this.

Thanks
Tiejun