lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [v4 2/8] iommu, x86: Define new irte structure for VT-d Posted-Interrupts
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joerg Roedel [mailto:joro@8bytes.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 11:17 PM
> To: Wu, Feng
> Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org; jiang.liu@linux.intel.com;
> iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [v4 2/8] iommu, x86: Define new irte structure for VT-d
> Posted-Interrupts
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 02:32:01AM +0000, Wu, Feng wrote:
> > > I think it is better to put this as a union into struct irte. It saves
> > > memory and unnecessary casting in later patches.
> >
> > Thanks for the comments!
>
> Thinking more about this, I think its probably fine to keep the two
> versions of the irte seperate like in this patch-set. It allows to
> update the non-posted irte when the posted irte is active at the moment
> and makes the transition between both irte variants easier.
>
> But what I still don't like is the type casting necessary when calling
> modify_irte(). Can you abstract this and put the decission whether irte
> or irte_pi is set active into modify_irte? It required to change the
> interface of modify_irte, but that should be easy.
>

Sound good! Then we can keep the difference inside modify_irte().

BTW, could you please have a look at other patches in this series?

Thanks,
Feng

>
> Joerg



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-01 11:21    [W:0.045 / U:2.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site