On 09.02.2024 09:39, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 02:57:30PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> ..., thus allowing them to become static. There's nothing x86-specific >> about these functions anyway. >> >> Since only the "iommu_inclusive_mapping" parameter declaration would be >> left in the file, move that as well. There's nothing VT-d specific about >> it (anymore?): "dom0-iommu=map-inclusive" is similarly generic, and >> documentation also doesn't say anything. > > Hm, I guess documentation should at least say that > iommu_inclusive_mapping is x86 specific, because it's not parsed on > Arm and hence might give the wrong impression that it's actually > acknowledged there.
In v2 I'm adding "(x86)" there. >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <[email protected]> Thanks. > Albeit I think it would be better to put the parsing in generic > iommu.c, so that the option gets parsed on Arm and > arch_iommu_hwdom_init() can print a warning message about it not > supported on Arm. Hmm, I would have considered doing things the other way around - make that part of parsing in parse_dom0_iommu_param() x86-only. I would feel odd to introduce an option to Arm, just to be able to report that it's unsupported. The more when generic option parsing code will already log unrecognized options (sadly such log messages aren't seen in the serial log, for being issued too early). But let's ask Arm folks what they'd prefer, by adding all of them to To:. Jan
