On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 07:16:52AM +0000, Rahul Singh wrote: > Thanks you everyone for reviewing the code. I will summarise what I have > understood from all the comments > and what I will be doing for the next version of the patch. Please let me > know your view on this. > > 1. Create a separate non-arch specific file "msi-intercept.c" for the below > newly introduced function and > compile that file if CONFIG_PCI_MSI_INTERCEPT is > enabled.CONFIG_PCI_MSI_INTERCEPT will be > enabled for x86 by default. Also Mention in the commit message that these > function will be needed for Xen to > support MSI interrupt within XEN. > > pdev_msi_initi(..) > pdev_msi_deiniti(..)
I would drop the last 'i' from both function names above, as we use init/deinit in the rest of the code base. > pdev_dump_msi(..), > pdev_msix_assign(..) > > 2. Create separate patch for iommu_update_ire_from_msi() related code. There > are two suggestion please help me which one to choose. > > - Move the iommu_update_ire_from_msi() function to asm-x86/iommu.h and > also move the hook from iommu_ops under CONFIG_X86. I would go for this one. > > - Implement a more generic function "arch_register_msi()"). This could > call iommu_update_ire_from_msi() on x86 and the > ITS related code once implemented on Arm. Introduce the new Kconfig > CONFIG_HAS_IOMMU_INTERRUPT_REMAP for this option. I think it's best to introduce this hook when you actually have to implement the Arm version of it. Thanks, Roger.
