From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48660) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dGhIz-0002xx-GF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 03:47:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dGhIv-0002KT-S3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 03:47:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39424) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dGhIv-0002JS-L6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 03:47:29 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <87d1ar504h.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20170601192206.3z6yki3sji5efrjc@aurel32.net> <2178962.Og9WLNWV2W@np-p-burton> <20170602041857.GA4056@pxdev.xzpeter.org> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 09:47:20 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20170602041857.GA4056@pxdev.xzpeter.org> (Peter Xu's message of "Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:18:57 +0800") Message-ID: <87r2z2kf07.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] msi: remove return code for msi_init() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Xu Cc: Paul Burton , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Marcel Apfelbaum , Paolo Bonzini , Aurelien Jarno , Richard Henderson Peter Xu writes: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 03:06:29PM -0700, Paul Burton wrote: >> Hi Aurelien/Paolo/Marcel, >> >> On Thursday, 1 June 2017 12:22:06 PDT Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> > On 2017-06-01 16:23, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> > > On 01/06/2017 10:27, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >> > > > On 31/05/2017 11:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> > > >> No, for now I'd rather just go and remove msi_nonbroken. When someone >> > > >> reports a bug, we can add back "msi_broken". >> > > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > I agree with the direction, but I am concerned msi_nonbroken is there >> > > > for a reason. >> > > > We might break some (obscure/not in use) machine. >> > > > Maybe we should CC all arch machine maintainers/contributors to give >> > > > them a chance to object... >> > > >> > > Yeah, Alpha, MIPS and SH are those that support PCI. Adding Richard and >> > > Aurelien, do your platforms support MSI on real hardware but not in QEMU? >> > >> > SH clearly doesn't support MSI. >> > >> > The oldest MIPS board also do not support MSI, but I guess the Boston >> > board might support it. I am adding Paul Burton in Cc: who probably >> > knows about that. >> > >> > Aurelien >> >> Indeed, real Boston hardware does support MSI (or rather, the Xilinx AXI >> Bridge for PCI Express IP used on Boston does) & we make use of it in Linux. >> >> Thanks, >> Paul > > Does this mean that we'd better still keep the msi_nonbroken bit? If we still need the "monkey-patch MSI-capable devices to hide board bugs" logic, it should become opt-in rather than opt-out, i.e. broken boards set msi_broken (with a suitable comment), non-broken boards don't touch it. > Anyway, maybe we can first merge Paolo's fix on edu device: > > [PATCH] edu: fix memory leak on msi_broken platforms > > Then we can see whether we still need the rest of the changes. > > Thanks,