From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/6] xen/MSI-X: drive maskall and enable bits through hypercalls
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 17:03:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <558064E80200007800085ACE@mail.emea.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1506161549320.21829@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
>>> On 16.06.15 at 16:56, <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 16.06.15 at 16:03, <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> 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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] xen/MSI-X: drive maskall and enable bits through hypercalls
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 17:03:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <558064E80200007800085ACE@mail.emea.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1506161549320.21829@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
>>> On 16.06.15 at 16:56, <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 16.06.15 at 16:03, <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-16 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-05 11:55 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] xen/pass-through: XSA-120, 128...131 follow-up Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 11:59 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/6] xen/MSI-X: latch MSI-X table writes Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 11:59 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 13:35 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 13:35 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:04 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:04 ` [Qemu-devel] " Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:48 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:48 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-05 12:01 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/6] xen/MSI-X: drive maskall and enable bits through hypercalls Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 12:01 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:03 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:03 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:19 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:56 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:56 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 16:03 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2015-06-16 16:03 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:19 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 12:02 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] xen/MSI-X: really enforce alignment Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 12:02 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:08 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:08 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-05 12:03 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/6] xen/pass-through: correctly deal with RW1C bits Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 12:03 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:19 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:38 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:38 ` [Qemu-devel] " Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:19 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-05 12:04 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/6] xen/pass-through: log errno values rather than function return ones Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 12:04 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:23 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:23 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-05 12:04 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] xen/pass-through: constify some static data Jan Beulich
2015-06-05 12:04 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:27 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:41 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:43 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:43 ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2015-06-16 14:41 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-16 14:27 ` Stefano Stabellini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=558064E80200007800085ACE@mail.emea.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.