From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754530Ab0CIKSe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 9 Mar 2010 05:18:34 -0500
Received: from smtp.ctxuk.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:1113 "EHLO
	SMTP.EU.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754190Ab0CIKS3 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 9 Mar 2010 05:18:29 -0500
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,607,1262563200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="9849573"
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:22:31 +0000
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
X-X-Sender: sstabellini@kaball-desktop
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@eu.citrix.com>
CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>, Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>,
       Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
       xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
       "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@eu.citrix.com>,
       Jeremy Fitzhardinge <Jeremy.Fitzhardinge@citrix.com>,
       Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@eu.citrix.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <kliw@darnok.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 7/7] xen: Enable event channel of PV extension
 of HVM
In-Reply-To: <1268128085.11737.59761.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003090954010.4869@kaball-desktop>
References: <1268032732-8025-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com>  <1268032732-8025-8-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com>  <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003081701160.16237@kaball-desktop>  <201003090953.16985.sheng@linux.intel.com>  <4B95F224.3060205@goop.org>
 <1268128085.11737.59761.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 07:00 +0000, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > On 03/08/2010 05:53 PM, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 March 2010 01:10:56 Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >    
> > >> I think that mapping interrupts into VIRQs is a bad idea: you should map
> > >> interrupts into pirqs instead, the code exists already on the kernel
> > >> side so we don't need to do any (ugly) change ther.
> > >>      
> > > The code existed in the pv_ops dom0 side, but not in the upstream Linux. The
> > > latter is our target. We want this work to be accepted by upstream Linux soon.
> 
> >    2. It has significant overlaps with the current xen.git development
> >       which is also targeted for upstream.  There's no point in creating
> >       an unnecessary duplicate mechanism when the infrastructure will be
> >       in place anyway.
> 
> There's also nothing stopping us from upstreaming portions of the "dom0"
> patchset ahead of full dom0 support if it is useful for some domU
> feature.
> 

Indeed.
You just need the pirq mappings and few other things, it shouldn't be
too hard.
At this point I am going to do that myself after this patch series is
completed.