> -----Original Message----- > From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-boun...@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan > Beulich > Sent: 25 February 2016 16:48 > To: Paul Durrant > Cc: xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] docs/design: introduce > HVMMEM_ioreq_serverX types > > >>> On 25.02.16 at 16:49, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: > > +To allow an IOREQ server to claim or release a claim to a type a new pair > > +of hypercalls will be introduced: > > + > > +- HVMOP\_map\_mem\_type\_to\_ioreq\_server > > +- HVMOP\_unmap\_mem\_type\_from\_ioreq\_server > > + > > +and an associated argument structure: > > + > > + struct hvm_ioreq_mem_type { > > + domid_t domid; /* IN - domain to be serviced */ > > + ioservid_t id; /* IN - server id */ > > + hvmmem_type_t type; /* IN - memory type */ > > + uint32_t flags; /* IN - types of access to be > > + intercepted */ > > + > > + #define _HVMOP_IOREQ_MEM_ACCESS_READ 0 > > + #define HVMOP_IOREQ_MEM_ACCESS_READ \ > > + (1 << _HVMOP_IOREQ_MEM_ACCESS_READ) > > + > > + #define _HVMOP_IOREQ_MEM_ACCESS_WRITE 1 > > + #define HVMOP_IOREQ_MEM_ACCESS_WRITE \ > > + (1 << _HVMOP_IOREQ_MEM_ACCESS_WRITE) > > + > > + }; > > How about having just one new hypercall, with flags being zero > meaning "unmap"?
Hmm, yes we could do it that way. I saves an op code so I'll re-spin the doc. Thanks, Paul > > Jan > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
