From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] Support for device capability
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:56:36 +0800
Message-ID: <200903041056.36603.sheng@linux.intel.com>
References: <1235982573-6932-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> <1235982573-6932-5-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> <20090303124207.GA15492@amt.cnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.21]:34292 "EHLO
	orsmga101.jf.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751463AbZCDC4n (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 3 Mar 2009 21:56:43 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20090303124207.GA15492@amt.cnet>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Tuesday 03 March 2009 20:42:07 Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> Hi Sheng,
>
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 04:29:27PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > This framework can be easily extended to support device capability, like
> > MSI/MSI-x.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  qemu/hw/pci.c |   85
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ qemu/hw/pci.h |
> >   30 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> > @@ -205,6 +215,15 @@ struct PCIDevice {
> >
> >      /* Current IRQ levels.  Used internally by the generic PCI code.  */
> >      int irq_state[4];
> > +
> > +    /* Device capability configuration space */
> > +    struct {
> > +        int supported;
> > +        uint8_t config[PCI_CAPABILITY_CONFIG_MAX_LENGTH];
> > +        unsigned int start, length;
> > +        PCICapConfigReadFunc *config_read;
> > +        PCICapConfigWriteFunc *config_write;
> > +    } cap;
> >  };
>
> Why do you have a copy of the capabilities config space? Why not just
> access PCIDevice->config directly?

I am not sure upstream would accept which. Separate the logic seems more clear 
and easy to accept to me...

-- 
regards
Yang, Sheng