Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201014175342.152712-1-jandryuk@gmail.com> <4973553f-fad2-83b9-fa19-26370ced2c2d@citrix.com>
In-Reply-To: <4973553f-fad2-83b9-fa19-26370ced2c2d@citrix.com>
From:   Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Oct 2020 15:31:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKf6xpvg0sk4V_txu-RYhK8cO4kLNSm8dFjEOCm38phMSYSorg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM][PATCH 0/2] Remove Xen PVH dependency on PCI
To:     Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
        xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 2:04 PM Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> On 14/10/2020 18:53, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> > A Xen PVH domain doesn't have a PCI bus or devices,
>
> [*] Yet.

:)

> > so it doesn't need PCI support built in.
>
> Untangling the dependences is a good thing, but eventually we plan to
> put an optional PCI bus back in, e.g. for SRIOV usecases.

Yes, and to be clear this change doesn't preclude including the PCI
code.  I was just looking to remove code from my VMs that aren't using
PCI devices.

Regards,
Jason