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=-7.3 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,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 040C5C433B4 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:36 +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 A424E613B2 for ; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A424E613B2 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.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.113869.216946 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lYsQG-00022U-F9; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:20 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 113869.216946; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lYsQG-00022N-B7; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:20 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 113869; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:18 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lYsQE-00022I-Ll for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:18 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id a3f746b0-5812-4390-b2c4-e91c4654cfb4; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92024B4B1; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:36:16 +0000 (UTC) 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: a3f746b0-5812-4390-b2c4-e91c4654cfb4 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1618932976; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1vmhD1JONKE+fqwyJTw4Eqjx4wm+/siPyUpTulmZ7fc=; b=lWSH7bSc7L9vfoQ2iQCFrSDpFUUsorBsEXCUlcGVZ84i0X8skUeoNC6GpSnzn642+7tXxu Mx5aNTkUZcW+V0fhxTBJ3jpAWtz93oeRhhf4PwGkwsKOVVUKJns4CRu+fNOJay00VrtNKc FSpBHgLAuCyGNzaMb4na9nZETSqhidU= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xen/pci: Refactor PCI MSI interrupts related code To: Rahul Singh Cc: Julien Grall , xen-devel , Bertrand Marquis , Andrew Cooper , Wei Liu , George Dunlap , Ian Jackson , Stefano Stabellini , Paul Durrant , Volodymyr Babchuk , Daniel De Graaf , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= References: <258c91c7-e733-3c40-5e4e-7b107e4d20c3@xen.org> <788665ad-9815-e3e9-2d5a-851b35c566d0@xen.org> <0d5539e3-32e3-8275-f695-351eda49cb29@xen.org> <6291effa-1589-1013-e89d-c795bce44d9c@suse.com> From: Jan Beulich Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:36:16 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 20.04.2021 15:45, Rahul Singh wrote: >> On 19 Apr 2021, at 1:33 pm, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 19.04.2021 13:54, Julien Grall wrote: >>> For the time being, I think move this code in x86 is a lot better than >>> #ifdef or keep the code in common code. >> >> Well, I would perhaps agree if it ended up being #ifdef CONFIG_X86. >> I would perhaps not agree if there was a new CONFIG_* which other >> (future) arch-es could select if desired. > > I agree with Julien moving the code to x86 file as currently it is referenced only in x86 code > and as of now we are not sure how other architecture will implement the Interrupt remapping > (via IOMMU or any other means). > > Let me know if you are ok with moving the code to x86. I can't answer this with "yes" or "no" without knowing what the alternative would be. As said, if the alternative is CONFIG_X86 #ifdef-ary, then yes. If a separate CONFIG_* gets introduced (and selected by X86), then a separate file (getting built only when that new setting is y) would seem better to me. Jan