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

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 03:41:51PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
> 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.

include/linux/init.h
> 
> >> 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?

Stefano, thoughts?

> 
> David
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
--
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/