[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] AMD IOMMU: drop amd_iommu_setup_hwdom_device()
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 08:04:16AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > By moving its bridge special casing to amd_iommu_add_device(), we can > pass the latter to setup_hwdom_pci_devices() and at once consistently > handle bridges discovered at boot time as well as such reported by Dom0 > later on. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> With one nit: > @@ -490,15 +465,25 @@ static int amd_iommu_add_device(u8 devfn > { > struct amd_iommu *iommu; > u16 bdf; > + > if ( !pdev->domain ) > return -EINVAL; > > bdf = PCI_BDF2(pdev->bus, pdev->devfn); > iommu = find_iommu_for_device(pdev->seg, bdf); > - if ( !iommu ) > + if ( unlikely(!iommu) ) > { > - AMD_IOMMU_DEBUG("Fail to find iommu." > - " %04x:%02x:%02x.%u cannot be assigned to dom%d\n", > + /* Filter bridge devices. */ > + if ( pdev->type == DEV_TYPE_PCI_HOST_BRIDGE && > + is_hardware_domain(pdev->domain) ) > + { > + AMD_IOMMU_DEBUG("Skipping host bridge %04x:%02x:%02x.%u\n", > + pdev->seg, PCI_BUS(bdf), PCI_SLOT(bdf), > + PCI_FUNC(bdf)); Is there any reason to use bdf instead of pdev->bus and devfn? I'm asking because that's done below, so I would rather use that for coherency. Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |