From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [v8][PATCH 06/16] hvmloader/pci: disable all pci
 devices conflicting with rdm
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 21:48:55 +0800
Message-ID: <55A7B647.8080808@intel.com>
References: <1437029582-19564-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<1437029582-19564-7-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<CAFLBxZZhDHi2XQ9UYkt6gfEiVMNRGxxer3zNptFGVsns2OYOfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<55A79AFA.3040500@intel.com>
	<CAFLBxZY86xDsNKO9zHMouk+sEPuCcYaR_49TQ87zjXxtBPqKnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<55A7AFF4.1040909@intel.com>
	<55A7CE890200007800091EC8@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <55A7CE890200007800091EC8@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

  > Except that this isn't valid C (no statement following the label). I can
> accept goto-s for some error handling cases where the alternatives
> might be considered even more ugly than using goto. But the way
> this or your original proposal look, I'd rather not have goto-s used
> like this.
>

What about this?

+    bool is_conflict = false;

      for ( devfn = 0; devfn < 256; devfn++ )
      {
@@ -60,7 +61,7 @@ static void disable_conflicting_devices(void)
              continue;

          /* Check all bars */
-        for ( bar = 0; bar < 7; bar++ )
+        for ( bar = 0; bar < 7 && !is_conflict; bar++ )
          {
              bar_reg = PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_0 + 4*bar;
              if ( bar == 6 )
@@ -89,7 +90,7 @@ static void disable_conflicting_devices(void)
              bar_sz = pci_readl(devfn, bar_reg);
              bar_sz &= PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK;

-            for ( i = 0; i < memory_map.nr_map ; i++ )
+            for ( i = 0; i < memory_map.nr_map && !is_conflict; i++ )
              {
                  if ( memory_map.map[i].type == E820_RESERVED )
                  {
@@ -105,13 +106,13 @@ static void disable_conflicting_devices(void)
                                 devfn>>3, devfn&7, bar_reg, bar_data);
                          cmd = pci_readw(devfn, PCI_COMMAND);
                          pci_writew(devfn, PCI_COMMAND, ~cmd);
-                        /* Jump next device. */
-                        goto check_next_device;
+                        /* So need to jump next device. */
+                        is_conflict = true;
                      }
                  }
              }
          }
- check_next_device:
+        is_conflict = false;
      }
  }

Thanks
Tiejun