[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/6] xen/MSI-X: drive maskall and enable bits through hypercalls
>>> On 16.06.15 at 16:56, <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 16.06.15 at 16:03, <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Fri, 5 Jun 2015, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> --- a/qemu/upstream/hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c >> >> +++ b/qemu/upstream/hw/xen/xen_pt_msi.c >> >> @@ -301,8 +301,11 @@ static int msix_set_enable(XenPCIPassthr >> >> return -1; >> >> } >> >> >> >> - return msi_msix_enable(s, s->msix->ctrl_offset, >> >> PCI_MSIX_FLAGS_ENABLE, >> >> - enabled); >> > >> > Would it make sense to remove msi_msix_enable completely to avoid any >> > further mistakes? >> >> Perhaps, yes. I think I actually had suggested so quite a while back. >> But I don't see myself wasting much more time on this, ehm, code. > > Isn't it just a matter of removing msi_msix_enable? It has another caller xen_pt_msi_set_enable(). If we went down the route of what this patch does, then MSI's enable bit should ultimately also be driven through a hypercall, and that would then be the point where the function would naturally disappear. But as said, it looks like we're intending to go a different route anyway. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |