From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: "Li, Liang Z" <liang.z.li@intel.com>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Cc: "peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com" <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
"stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com"
<stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>,
"Hu, Robert" <robert.hu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] xen-pt: Fix bug cause PCI devices re-attach failed
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 16:16:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <552E72D2.8080405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F2CBF3009FA73547804AE4C663CAB28E4F2769@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On 15/04/2015 16:14, Li, Liang Z wrote:
> Yes, it's the right place. Put aside the bug fix, I think the memory_region_ref/unref pair
> should be move to xen_pt_region_update after the conditional as you point out.
> Do you think so?
It would make sense, but I was just guessing... I'm still not sure
whether that causes any difference, also because I'm not familiar with
the Xen PCI passthrough code.
Paolo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: "Li, Liang Z" <liang.z.li@intel.com>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Cc: "peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com" <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
"stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com"
<stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>,
"Hu, Robert" <robert.hu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen-pt: Fix bug cause PCI devices re-attach failed
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 16:16:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <552E72D2.8080405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F2CBF3009FA73547804AE4C663CAB28E4F2769@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On 15/04/2015 16:14, Li, Liang Z wrote:
> Yes, it's the right place. Put aside the bug fix, I think the memory_region_ref/unref pair
> should be move to xen_pt_region_update after the conditional as you point out.
> Do you think so?
It would make sense, but I was just guessing... I'm still not sure
whether that causes any difference, also because I'm not familiar with
the Xen PCI passthrough code.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-15 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-13 14:12 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] xen-pt: Fix bug cause PCI devices re-attach failed Liang Li
2015-04-13 14:12 ` Liang Li
2015-04-13 14:28 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2015-04-13 14:28 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-04-15 14:14 ` [Qemu-devel] " Li, Liang Z
2015-04-15 14:14 ` Li, Liang Z
2015-04-15 14:16 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2015-04-15 14:16 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=552E72D2.8080405@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=liang.z.li@intel.com \
--cc=peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=robert.hu@intel.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=yang.z.zhang@intel.com \
/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.