On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 09:43:43AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 23.02.17 at 12:52, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: > > And then remove hvm_vioapic (since it just contains a hvm_hw_ioapic struct > > now). This is a preparatory change for introducing support for multiple vIO > > APICs per domain. > > Having gone through the rest of this series, I think the replacing of > vioapic pointers by domain ones goes too far here. Especially the > low level functions really ought to be dealing with individual IO-APICs > instead of their entire set. Hence where a domain pointer is needed, > I think it should be added without removing the vioapic one. > > In the end - what's the fundamental need you try to address with > the patch here? I.e. with multiple IO-APICs, what's wrong with still > having a "back pointer" to the domain in each of the structures?
It looked kind of redundant to have a domain back pointer in each of the structures, but maybe it's best to do it that way, since I expect less changes will be needed overall. Let me try to apply the requested changes to the layout of the structures and I will get back to you. Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
