> > ret_t do_iommu_op(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg, unsigned int count)
>
> Shouldn't this be changed to be pv_iommu_op_t? instead of void?
>
>
> > {
> > -return -ENOSYS;
> > +ret_t ret = 0;
> > +int i;
>
> unsigned int ?
> > +struct pv_iommu_op op;
> > +struct domain
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:10:32AM +, Malcolm Crossley wrote:
> Implement above ops according to PV-IOMMU design draft D.
.. which would be great if they were part of this patch series
and you could just: in docs/misc/blah.
>
> Currently restricted to hardware domains only due to RFC status.
Implement above ops according to PV-IOMMU design draft D.
Currently restricted to hardware domains only due to RFC status.
Signed-off-by: Malcolm Crossley
--
Cc: jbeul...@suse.com
Cc: k...@xen.org
Cc: t...@xen.org
Cc: andrew.coop...@citrix.com
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
---
xen/common/pv_iommu
