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=-9.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 21468C4361B for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 13:56:36 +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 D35B5206DB for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 13:56:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D35B5206DB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.47454.83944 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kmdTc-0007n6-SR; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:56:24 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 47454.83944; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:56:24 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kmdTc-0007mz-Od; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:56:24 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 47454; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:56:24 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kmdTc-0007ms-8J for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:56:24 +0000 Received: from mail-lj1-x243.google.com (unknown [2a00:1450:4864:20::243]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id b810822c-be0a-41eb-a1b8-cf4f6314a290; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 13:56:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x243.google.com with SMTP id t22so19537155ljk.0 for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 05:56:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.7] ([212.22.223.21]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z16sm3467677ljc.27.2020.12.08.05.56.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 05:56:21 -0800 (PST) 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" X-Inumbo-ID: b810822c-be0a-41eb-a1b8-cf4f6314a290 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=AEM4r0RQc1Iqs4XZv1K4qOyAXvA0DEIwLHJvd9HvmIk=; b=WvegLxUyhjkNVY952bMNMCGBtJeckA1Qa20HLKxPZS2hAR9SyTe2nGYCyPROHYtvhV LqRGcG4nhJsaZPKF6AvUKX1QN2dYK8BiuKI6989KQpQBxRxrJdxYK051W6w1hvuA9hCD W188nak1SKCCDkl+htCcwjbi2OMJI5hZZAlGMGTAoM389Ham2RdAyBPEVFgZw4LSwO5n /TpESx8/b3WbNVDbq0BrlYeT4Og9QJzuSt8iYplVaHMYTzavZkCgTTH9pp8WrxvhkMjt l5zP3fi6K2dT9DjwP+uSrYsE5DvfQZ/sOWnTZJM0LGwYcVby484NassSCCjsG3BIY43r 3/lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=AEM4r0RQc1Iqs4XZv1K4qOyAXvA0DEIwLHJvd9HvmIk=; b=rhKzdtnKmwpVwxZxaCYj8HJeTAPqfPDweifkBLK/IAzzIZR9ARsmkKqraZOZeM56qN 2SkELSKB0wkar/q0e1H9QnTay/PUivArziLHvqfCtR+clakBSuvyxYXyf3sxp3lXR0j8 13cSJ/TXN5utxPqtLLXUfVufuPU3vfr+jRh4xNnBXIh9vf616iqiq5ol2RzwFMWaDlUC POmF/vT4FUtd+M2m49SNcGvP8q81Kp/dvCkN7xLYGyHkxzqfnSpZeB/622gyGLl0bonK gBQwKVbiN8WqDbns/I+bNNDEWJW1vcSYtLwcF2wG7RZD4upNdzapXqtEeuI7qwRCmULy 3j2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530iOQfI/+1vFELX/9QvNOHTegQhIRkQEOrecgIxEUq/P2Ep+Bl7 k9Ti+o38mxwRf4nSGL7LNz+NdQoQ1SWFuA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw7FN0rfIvdVNrQvdBwbiaeRJPsY9a8LYf8zAGDvsmWUeYOkad8vtxm8Y4XoMcSmjo/HbONaw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1027:: with SMTP id w7mr333275ljm.297.1607435782086; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 05:56:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 04/23] xen/ioreq: Make x86's IOREQ feature common To: Jan Beulich Cc: Oleksandr Tyshchenko , Andrew Cooper , George Dunlap , Ian Jackson , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , Wei Liu , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= , Paul Durrant , Tim Deegan , Julien Grall , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org References: <1606732298-22107-1-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com> <1606732298-22107-5-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com> <4a82d6f3-6b6c-566a-6ad0-36e22df323fa@gmail.com> <536b5e63-0605-f4d3-e163-dff67ec0422d@suse.com> From: Oleksandr Message-ID: <8ee60a49-8e64-ae25-510b-42eb243ea3ae@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 15:56:15 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <536b5e63-0605-f4d3-e163-dff67ec0422d@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US On 08.12.20 11:21, Jan Beulich wrote: Hi Jan > On 07.12.2020 20:43, Oleksandr wrote: >> On 07.12.20 13:41, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 30.11.2020 11:31, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote: >>>> @@ -38,42 +37,6 @@ int arch_ioreq_server_get_type_addr(const struct domain *d, >>>> uint64_t *addr); >>>> void arch_ioreq_domain_init(struct domain *d); >>> As already mentioned in an earlier reply: What about these? They >>> shouldn't get declared once per arch. If anything, ones that >>> want to be inline functions can / should remain in the per-arch >>> header. >> Don't entirely get a suggestion. Is the suggestion to make "simple" ones >> inline? Why not, there are a few ones which probably want to be inline, >> such as the following for example: >> - arch_ioreq_domain_init >> - arch_ioreq_server_destroy >> - arch_ioreq_server_destroy_all >> - arch_ioreq_server_map_mem_type (probably) First of all, thank you for the clarification, now your point is clear to me. > Before being able to make a suggestion, I need to have my question > answered: Why do the arch_*() declarations live in the arch header? > They represent a common interface (between common and arch code) > and hence should be declared in exactly one place. I got it, I had a wrong assumption that arch hooks declarations should live in arch code. > It is only at > the point where you/we _consider_ making some of them inline that > moving those (back) to the arch header may make sense. Albeit even > then I'd prefer if only the ones get moved which are expected to > be inline for all arch-es. Others would better have the arch header > indicate to the common one that no declaration is needed (such that > the declaration still remains common for all arch-es using out-of- > line functions). I got it as well. Well, I think, in order to address your comments two options are available: 1. All arch hooks are out-of-line: мove all arch hook declarations to the common header here and modify "[PATCH V3 14/23] arm/ioreq: Introduce arch specific bits for IOREQ/DM features" to make all Arm variants out-of-line (I made them inline since all of them are just stubs). 2. Some of arch hooks are inline: consider which want to be inline (for both arch-es) and place them into arch headers, other ones should remain in the common header. My question is which option is more suitable? -- Regards, Oleksandr Tyshchenko