Re: [PATCH-for-10.0 v2 05/13] hw/pci: Propagate bar_at_addr_0_refused to pci_root_bus_internal_init()

["Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>]

On 5/12/24 17:44, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 11:22, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> Have pci_root_bus_internal_init() callers set the
>> 'bar_at_addr_0_refused' argument. No logical change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   hw/pci/pci.c | 11 +++++++----
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/pci/pci.c b/hw/pci/pci.c
>> index 27b66583e54..8eacb8f82fc 100644
>> --- a/hw/pci/pci.c
>> +++ b/hw/pci/pci.c
>> @@ -529,7 +529,8 @@ static bool machine_refuses_bar_at_addr_0(void)
>>
>>   static void pci_root_bus_internal_init(PCIBus *bus, DeviceState *parent,
>>                                          MemoryRegion *mem, MemoryRegion *io,
>> -                                       uint8_t devfn_min)
>> +                                       uint8_t devfn_min,
>> +                                       bool bar_at_addr_0_refused)
>>   {
>>       assert(PCI_FUNC(devfn_min) == 0);
>>       bus->devfn_min = devfn_min;
>> @@ -537,7 +538,7 @@ static void pci_root_bus_internal_init(PCIBus *bus, DeviceState *parent,
>>       bus->address_space_mem = mem;
>>       bus->address_space_io = io;
>>       bus->flags |= PCI_BUS_IS_ROOT;
>> -    if (machine_refuses_bar_at_addr_0()) {
>> +    if (bar_at_addr_0_refused && machine_refuses_bar_at_addr_0()) {
> 
> Should this be || rather than &&  ? If I understand the
> intent correctly, we want to prevent a BAR at address 0
> if either:
>   * the MachineClass field says we don't want one
>     (legacy handling, eventually goes away)
>   * the new command line argument says we don't want one
> 
> rather than only if *both* say "no address 0" ?

Oops :)

> 
> thanks
> -- PMM