From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46395 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PGu4l-000783-OS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:54:00 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PGu4j-0002dx-S9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:53:59 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16749) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PGu4j-0002dm-LX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:53:57 -0500 From: Alex Williamson In-Reply-To: <20101112092038.GI7631@redhat.com> References: <20101112024710.31423.99667.stgit@s20.home> <20101112025602.31423.95572.stgit@s20.home> <20101112092038.GI7631@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 06:53:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1289570035.2805.73.camel@x201> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 6/8] device-assignment: Move PCI capabilities to match physical hardware List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: chrisw@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org 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