From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41077)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>) id 1ZQLTH-0005dv-Tq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:21:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>) id 1ZQLTE-0003RN-DD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:20:59 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:46247)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>) id 1ZQLTE-0003QA-2r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:20:56 -0400
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:20:43 -0400
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <20150814202043.GA14015@l.oracle.com>
References: <1435866681-18468-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
	<1435866681-18468-9-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1507171710110.17378@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507171710110.17378@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 08/10] xen/pt: Make
	xen_pt_unregister_device idempotent
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, JBeulich@suse.com

> > @@ -818,10 +819,13 @@ static void xen_pt_unregister_device(PCIDevice *d)
> >  {
> >      XenPCIPassthroughState *s = XEN_PT_DEVICE(d);
> >      uint8_t machine_irq = s->machine_irq;
> > -    uint8_t intx = xen_pt_pci_intx(s);
> > +    uint8_t intx;
> >      int rc;
> >  
> > -    if (machine_irq) {
> > +     /* Note that if xen_host_pci_device_put had closed config_fd, then
> > +      * intx value becomes 0xff. */
> > +    intx = xen_pt_pci_intx(s);
> 
> Wouldn't it make sense to move this assignment inside the if below?

Totally. Plus it also allows me to remove the comment above.
> 
> Aside from this small item:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>

Thank you.