On 8/23/18 12:47 PM, Paul Durrant wrote: > The name 'need_iommu()' is a little confusing as it suggests a domain needs > to use the IOMMU but something might not be set up yet, when in fact it > represents a tri-state value (not a boolean as might be expected) where > -1 means 'IOMMU mappings being set up' and 1 means 'IOMMU mappings have > been fully set up'. > > Two different meanings are also inferred from the macro it in various > places in the code: > > - Some callers want to test whether a domain has IOMMU mappings at all > - Some callers want to test whether they need to synchronize the domain's > P2M and IOMMU mappings > > This patch replaces the 'need_iommu' tri-state value with a defined > enumeration and adds a boolean flag 'need_sync' to separate these meanings, > and places both of these in struct domain_iommu, rather than directly in > struct domain. > This patch also creates two new boolean macros: > > - 'has_iommu_pt()' evaluates to true if a domain has IOMMU mappings, even > if they are still under construction. > - 'need_iommu_pt_sync()' evaluates to true if a domain requires explicit > synchronization of the P2M and IOMMU mappings. > > All callers of need_iommu() are then modified to use the macro appropriate > to what they are trying to test. > > NOTE: The test of need_iommu(d) in the AMD IOMMU initialization code has > been replaced with a test of iommu_dom0_strict since this more > accurately reflects the meaning of the test and brings it into > line with a similar test in the Intel VT-d code. > > Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <paul.durr...@citrix.com>
For the vm_event part: Acked-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojoc...@bitdefender.com> Thanks, Razvan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel