Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ian Campbell
Date: Thursday, May 21, 2009 - 4:03 am

On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 06:39 -0400, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:

Well, defining a static inline function when a CONFIG option is disabled
is fairly idiomatic in the kernel and in general hiding these sorts of
things in the headers in this way is preferred to having them in .c
files. See e.g. the handling of CONFIG_PRINTK in include/linux/kernel.h
or CONFIG_HIGHMEM in include/linux/highmem.h for just two examples out
of many.


I nearly suggested that for this hook it might actually be preferable to
put the one line Xen hook directly into swiotlb.c. I didn't think this
suggestion would go down very well though.

In any case something along these lines needs to go somewhere. I think
you are slightly mischaracterising this as an "ugly hack" -- it is a
necessary interface to enable a particular use-case, and it actually has
a very small cross section (it's basically five or six lines of code).

If there was a cleaner way to achieve the same result we would of course
go with that. I don't think duplicating swiotlb.c, as has been suggested
as the alternative, just for that one hook point makes sense.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Campbell
Current Noise: Isis - Altered Course

"For a male and female to live continuously together is...  biologically
speaking, an extremely unnatural condition."
		-- Robert Briffault

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Thu May 14, 12:54 pm)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ingo Molnar, (Fri May 15, 11:35 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri May 15, 12:59 pm)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Sun May 17, 6:36 pm)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Sun May 17, 6:42 pm)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ingo Molnar, (Mon May 18, 1:40 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Mon May 18, 10:27 pm)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ingo Molnar, (Tue May 19, 6:03 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Tue May 19, 8:30 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ian Campbell, (Tue May 19, 8:56 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Wed May 20, 10:06 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Thu May 21, 1:54 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ian Campbell, (Thu May 21, 3:27 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ian Campbell, (Thu May 21, 3:28 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Thu May 21, 3:39 am)
Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ian Campbell, (Thu May 21, 3:48 am)
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, Ian Campbell, (Thu May 21, 4:03 am)
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Thu May 21, 4:19 am)
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Where do we stand with the Xen patches?, FUJITA Tomonori, (Thu May 21, 10:21 am)