Re: [PATCH v12 15/18] xen/pvh: Piggyback on PVHVM for grant driver(v2)

[David Vrabel]

On 03/01/14 14:44, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 11:54:13AM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
>> On 02/01/14 18:50, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 04:32:03PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
>>>> On 01/01/14 04:35, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>>> @@ -1320,4 +1323,4 @@ static int __gnttab_init(void)
>>>>>  	return gnttab_init();
>>>>>  }
>>>>>  
>>>>> -core_initcall(__gnttab_init);
>>>>> +core_initcall_sync(__gnttab_init);
>>>>
>>>> Why has this become _sync?
>>>
>>> It needs to run _after_ the xen_pvh_gnttab_setup has run (which is
>>> at gnttab_init):
>>
>>
>> The use of core_initcall_sync() doesn't imply any ordering to me.  Can't
> 
> It has a clear ordering property.

This really isn't obvious to me.  Can you point to the docs/code the
guarantee this?  I couldn't find it.

>> you call xen_pvh_gnttab_setup() from within __gnttab_init() ?
> 
> No. That is due to the fact that __gnttab_init() is in drivers/xen and is
> also used by the ARM code.
> 
> Stefano in his previous review mentioned he would like PVH specific
> code in arch/x86:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/18/507

Call it xen_arch_gnttab_setup() and add weak stub for other architectures?

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/