From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] device-assignment: Move PCI capabilities to match physical hardware Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 06:53:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1289570035.2805.73.camel@x201> References: <20101112024710.31423.99667.stgit@s20.home> <20101112025602.31423.95572.stgit@s20.home> <20101112092038.GI7631@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, chrisw@redhat.com To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28918 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757301Ab0KLNx5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:53:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20101112092038.GI7631@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 11:20 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 07:56:13PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > > Now that common PCI code doesn't have a hangup on capabilities > > being contiguous, > > Hmm, this comment confused me : there's no requirement of > contigious allocations in current code in pci.c, is there? Exactly, but the code used to have cap.start and cap.length, which implied it was contiguous. Since those were removed in 5/8, we don't need to worry about where the physical capabilities land in config space. Thanks, Alex