From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86/MSI-X: cleanup Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 19:56:49 +0000 Message-ID: <55034101.4070309@citrix.com> References: <54FF26F002000078000682F7@mail.emea.novell.com> <54FF29FE0200007800068361@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YWVhX-0004bT-G2 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 13 Mar 2015 19:56:55 +0000 In-Reply-To: <54FF29FE0200007800068361@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich , xen-devel Cc: Keir Fraser List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/03/15 16:29, Jan Beulich wrote: > - __pci_enable_msix() now checks that an MSI-X capability was actually > found > - pass "pos" to msix_capability_init() as both callers already know it > (and hence there's no need to re-obtain it) > - call __pci_disable_msi{,x}() directly instead of via > pci_disable_msi() from __pci_enable_msi{x,}() state validation paths "__pci_enable_msi{x,}()'s state validation paths" ? > - use msix_control_reg() instead of open coding it > - log message adjustments > - coding style corrections > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper It occurs to me that for further cleanup, it might be quite useful to have a concrete sbdf type. All this code does huge quantities of moving sbdf representations in and out of a u32, and using 4 parameters instead of 1 to functions will cause excessive register scheduling issues. In addition, a custom %p format identifier would help us move in the direction of consistent representation (which we are currently a long way from). ~Andrew