[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: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:39:12 +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: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 07:39:56 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 2015/6/12 17:20, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
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.
Just let me go this simple way now.
Thanks
Tiejun
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
