> -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Pau Monne <[email protected]> > Sent: 22 August 2019 13:55 > To: Paul Durrant <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Jan Beulich <[email protected]>; Andrew > Cooper > <[email protected]>; Wei Liu <[email protected]>; George Dunlap > <[email protected]>; Ian > Jackson <[email protected]>; Julien Grall <[email protected]>; Konrad > Rzeszutek Wilk > <[email protected]>; Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]>; Tim > (Xen.org) <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] ioreq: provide support for long-running operations... > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 11:15:50AM +0200, Paul Durrant wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Roger Pau Monne <[email protected]> > > > Sent: 21 August 2019 15:59 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Cc: Roger Pau Monne <[email protected]>; Paul Durrant > > > <[email protected]>; Jan Beulich > > > <[email protected]>; Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>; Wei Liu > > > <[email protected]>; George > Dunlap > > > <[email protected]>; Ian Jackson <[email protected]>; Julien > > > Grall > <[email protected]>; > > > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]>; Stefano Stabellini > > > <[email protected]>; Tim > > > (Xen.org) <[email protected]> > > > Subject: [PATCH 7/7] ioreq: provide support for long-running operations... > > > > > > ...and switch vPCI to use this infrastructure for long running > > > physmap modification operations. > > > > > > This allows to get rid of the vPCI specific modifications done to > > > handle_hvm_io_completion and allows generalizing the support for > > > long-running operations to other internal ioreq servers. Such support > > > is implemented as a specific handler that can be registers by internal > > > ioreq servers and that will be called to check for pending work. > > > Returning true from this handler will prevent the vcpu from running > > > until the handler returns false. > > > > Rather than having another callback can the handler not be re-called with > > same ioreq? It could > return different values depending on whether there is more work to do > (requiring another call) or > whether it is done and the vcpu can be resumed. Would that work? > > I guess this would work also. The issue with this approach is that I > would have to find somewhere to store the ioreq while the operation is > being processed, which is not required with the proposed two handler > approach.
The ioreq already is stored in v->arch.hvm.hvm_io.io_req anyway, so can't you use that copy? Paul > > Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
