On 23.10.2025 14:23, Teddy Astie wrote: > Le 23/10/2025 à 12:20, Jan Beulich a écrit : >> On 23.10.2025 11:12, Teddy Astie wrote: >>> The x86 subdirectory was originally meant to split x86-specific logic from >>> general VT-d code. Today, Xen only supports VT-d on x86 and the code >>> actually >>> implemented in this subdirectory isn't x86-specific (e.g ATS code is not x86 >>> specific). >>> >>> As ats.c is the only remaining file in this directory, and isn't x86 >>> specific, >>> move it up to vtd directory and remove the now empty x86 subdirectory. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Teddy Astie <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> v2: >>> - reviewed commit description >>> >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/Makefile | 3 +-- >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/{x86 => }/ats.c | 10 +++++----- >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/Makefile | 1 - >>> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>> rename xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/{x86 => }/ats.c (97%) >>> delete mode 100644 xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/Makefile >> >> I should have remembered this when looking at v1 already: While some of your >> other changes go farther (and hence are likely preferable), this one I'd >> rather >> not see go in. I'd favor respective pieces of what's still pending from >> https://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2024-02/msg00983.html. First >> and >> foremost because ATS really is not only not x86-specific - it's not VT-d- >> specific either. > > CC-ing Jason Andryuk now reviewer of AMD-Vi code and likely interested > with https://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2024-02/msg00983.html > at least for the AMD part. > > I wasn't aware of this pending series. And some of my patches overlap > with some of these ones, so I guess we need to complete it and then I > rebase mine on top of it.
It's going to be an intermix, I think. Your map/unmap changes are preferable to mine, for example. Jan
