[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [v3][PATCH 04/16] xen/passthrough: extend hypercall to support rdm reservation policy
- To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 17:20:56 +0800
- Cc: "tim@xxxxxxx" <tim@xxxxxxx>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, "wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx" <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>, "ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx" <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, "andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx" <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx" <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Yang Z Zhang <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 09:21:08 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 2015/6/12 16:45, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.06.15 at 08:31, <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2015/6/11 17:28, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
@@ -1940,7 +1942,8 @@ static int intel_iommu_remove_device(u8 devfn, struct
pci_dev
*pdev)
PCI_DEVFN2(bdf) != devfn )
continue;
- rmrr_identity_mapping(pdev->domain, 0, rmrr);
+ rmrr_identity_mapping(pdev->domain, 0, rmrr,
+ XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_RELAXED);
ditto
It doesn't matter when we're trying to remove a device since we don't
care this flag.
In such a case it helps to add a brief comment saying that the precise
value passed is irrelevant. Or maybe this could be expressed by
Okay.
folding this and the "map" parameters of the function (in which case it
might become self-documenting)?
Sorry, I don't know exactly how to implement this idea. Have we any
similar example on Xen side?
Thanks
Tiejun
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
