Hi Jan, > On 19 Aug 2021, at 1:12 pm, Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 19.08.2021 14:02, Rahul Singh wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/domctl.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domctl.c >> @@ -173,6 +173,8 @@ long arch_do_domctl(struct xen_domctl *domctl, struct >> domain *d, >> >> return rc; >> } >> + case XEN_DOMCTL_ioport_permission: >> + return 0; > > I don't think returning success for something that doesn't make > much sense in the first place (there aren't truly "I/O ports" on > Arm afaik) is a good idea. > Instead I think the tool stack should > avoid making arch-specific calls in an arch-independent way.
I agree with you let me try to modify the toolstack not to call the arch-specific call. Regards, Rahul > >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/physdev.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/physdev.c >> @@ -42,6 +42,9 @@ int do_physdev_op(int cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) >> arg) >> break; >> } >> #endif >> + case PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq: >> + case PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq: >> + break; > > Less sure here, but I'm not convinced either. > > Jan >
