On 18.05.2023 23:06, Stewart Hildebrand wrote:
> --- a/xen/include/xen/iommu.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/iommu.h
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> #include <xen/spinlock.h>
> #include <public/domctl.h>
> #include <public/hvm/ioreq.h>
> +#include <asm/acpi.h>
> #include <asm/device.h>
I view this as problematic: It'll require all architectures with an
IOMMU implementation to have an asm/acpi.h. I think this wants to go
inside an "#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI" and then ...
> @@ -228,12 +230,25 @@ int iommu_release_dt_devices(struct domain *d);
> * (IOMMU is not enabled/present or device is not connected to it).
> */
> int iommu_add_dt_device(struct dt_device_node *np);
> +int iommu_add_dt_pci_sideband_ids(struct pci_dev *pdev);
>
> int iommu_do_dt_domctl(struct xen_domctl *, struct domain *,
> XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_domctl_t));
>
> +#else /* !HAS_DEVICE_TREE */
> +static inline int iommu_add_dt_pci_sideband_ids(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> #endif /* HAS_DEVICE_TREE */
>
> +static inline int iommu_add_pci_sideband_ids(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + if ( acpi_disabled )
... the same #ifdef would be added around this if().
All of this of course only if this is deemed enough to allow co-existance
of DT and ACPI (which I'm not convinced it is, but I don't know enough
about DT and e.g. possible mixed configurations).
Jan
> + return iommu_add_dt_pci_sideband_ids(pdev);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> struct page_info;
>
> /*
