On Mon, 16 May 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 05/16/2016 07:23 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> >> On 04/27/2016 09:40 AM, David Vrabel wrote:
> >>> On 27/04/16 14:38, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> >>>> int xen_nr_legacy_irqs()
> >>>> {
> >>>> if (xen_hvm_domain())
> >>>> return nr_legacy_irqs();
> >>>> if (xen_initial_domain())
> >>>> return NR_IRQS_LEGACY;
> >>>> return 0;
> >>>> }
> >>> Yeah, if that does the right thing...
> >> I think it will break xen_allocate_irq_gsi() again, unless we check for HVM
> >> domain explicitly. Which would be ugly.
> > I guess we all forgot about this patch, in the meantime the merge window
> > has opened.
> >
> > Should we go ahead with:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146115812124261&w=2
> >
> > ?
> > It might not be complete, but it is certainly an improvement.
>
> Yes, I think what you have there is the best option. What I suggested
> above won't work and adding another check for HVM domain in
> xen_allocate_irq_gsi() won't look good (although it does work).
>
> It will need to go to stable as well (4.4+ ?)
All right, I'll commit it to for-linus-4.7 with
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
