From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: yamahata@valinux.co.jp, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] msi: Store the capability size in PCIDevice
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 16:07:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101102140736.GB29373@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288706438.3045.7.camel@x201>
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 08:00:38AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 11:25 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 11:37:53PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > Avoid needing to get the MSI capability flags every time we need to
> > > check the capability length. This also makes it accessible outside
> > > of msi.c, making it easier for users to filter config space writes
> > > using msi_cap and msi_cap_size.
> >
> > I think for this last use-case, we are better off with returning a
> > boolean from msi_write_config which tells us whether the write is in
> > range. This has the advantage in that it will also work well for other
> > capabilities. Or second best, if that is insufficient for some reason,
> > export an msi_cap_size function.
>
> Returning whether the write was in range isn't enough. For device
> assignment, I need to know whether the capability was enabled or
> disabled. This currently means checking the enable state before and
> after calling msi_write_config and doing the appropriate backend setup.
Sounds good. Why does this mean you need the capability size?
bool was_enabled = msi_enabled(dev);
msi_write_config(..)
if (was_enabled != msi_enabled(dev)) {
}
> I think the only way I could blindly call the msi/x write config
> routines is if we init the capability with enable/disable callbacks.
> I'd be ok with an msi_cap_size function if we don't want to go that far
> too. What do you prefer? Thanks,
>
> Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-02 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-02 5:37 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] msi: Small fixes and enhancements Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 5:37 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] msi: Allow pre-existing MSI capabilities Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 12:02 ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 5:37 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] msi: Cleanup uninit Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 5:37 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] msi: Store the capability size in PCIDevice Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 9:25 ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 14:00 ` Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 14:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2010-11-02 14:23 ` Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 15:39 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 16:08 ` Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 19:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20101102140736.GB29373@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=yamahata@valinux.co.jp \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).