From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54216)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <tiejun.chen@intel.com>) id 1ZArNu-0000kJ-TO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 23:11:27 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <tiejun.chen@intel.com>) id 1ZArNr-0006fb-I5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 23:11:26 -0400
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:48955)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <tiejun.chen@intel.com>) id 1ZArNr-0006fJ-CH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 23:11:23 -0400
Message-ID: <5595FD51.8080902@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 11:11:13 +0800
From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1433493901-9332-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<1433493901-9332-10-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1507011656400.17378@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507011656400.17378@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [v8][RESEND][PATCH 09/10] xen,
 gfx passthrough: register host bridge specific to passthrough
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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net, ehabkost@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com

   >>   #ifdef CONFIG_XEN
>> +static void igd_passthrough_pc_init_pci(MachineState *machine)
>> +{
>> +    pc_init1(machine,
>> +             TYPE_I440FX_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE,
>> +             TYPE_IGD_PASSTHROUGH_I440FX_PCI_DEVICE);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pc_init_pci(MachineState *machine)
>> +{
>> +    pc_init1(machine,
>> +             TYPE_I440FX_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE,
>> +             TYPE_I440FX_PCI_DEVICE);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pc_xen_hvm_init_pci(MachineState *machine)
>> +{
>> +    if (has_igd_gfx_passthru)
>> +        igd_passthrough_pc_init_pci(machine);
>> +    else
>> +        pc_init_pci(machine);
>> +}
>
> I don't see any value in introducing pc_init_pci and
> igd_passthrough_pc_init_pci.  I would expand both of them here.
>

Agree, and what about this?

static void pc_xen_hvm_init_pci(MachineState *machine)
{
     const char *pci_type = has_igd_gfx_passthru ?
             TYPE_IGD_PASSTHROUGH_I440FX_PCI_DEVICE : 
TYPE_I440FX_PCI_DEVICE;

     pc_init1(machine,
              TYPE_I440FX_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE,
              pci_type);
}

Thanks
Tiejun