On 28.10.2020 16:20, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> On 28 Oct 2020, at 11:51 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 26.10.2020 18:17, Rahul Singh wrote:
>>> +int arch_pci_release_devices(struct domain *d)
>>> +{
>>> +return pci_clean_dpci_irqs(d);
>>> +}
>>
>> Why the extra function layer?
>
> Is that ok if I r
Hello Jan,
> On 28 Oct 2020, at 11:51 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 26.10.2020 18:17, Rahul Singh wrote:
>> passthrough/pci.c file is common for all architecture, but there is x86
>> sepcific code in this file.
>
> The code you move doesn't look to be x86 specific in the sense that
> it makes n
On 28/10/2020 11:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.10.2020 18:17, Rahul Singh wrote:
passthrough/pci.c file is common for all architecture, but there is x86
sepcific code in this file.
The code you move doesn't look to be x86 specific in the sense that
it makes no sense on other architectures, b
On 26.10.2020 18:17, Rahul Singh wrote:
> passthrough/pci.c file is common for all architecture, but there is x86
> sepcific code in this file.
The code you move doesn't look to be x86 specific in the sense that
it makes no sense on other architectures, but just because certain
pieces are missing
On Mon, 26 Oct 2020, Rahul Singh wrote:
> passthrough/pci.c file is common for all architecture, but there is x86
> sepcific code in this file.
^ specific
> Move x86 specific code to the x86 directory to avoid compilation error
> for other architecture.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off
passthrough/pci.c file is common for all architecture, but there is x86
sepcific code in this file.
Move x86 specific code to the x86 directory to avoid compilation error
for other architecture.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Rahul Singh
---
xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c| 75 +---
