[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 3/3] xen-pciback: simplify vpci's find hook
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:05:59 -0400
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ezO9lxcEYeQ417PQsi1opsbAwOPW7jGBct78DrLEOVY=; b=m9jOMw+DEseduba9TXGW+zrABSDecSerOIkLBJ0uUbB3looTb9nJ77dcqzEJSoavDaptcoDhWxe9F4lJIpD1ydrf1Hm9YJuzgV4UnPazlzSyzohMR6yrObJwC4FS90kBgc6BExukPbIolGW1We2o94cZM18GopCDkSB5nbz+VVIg0QX2Mx3jxBvLjFYp1GurtdzJOD9xJiC5wnxJXxLDG3JaUzvVqRHEpojsGOPdRkdyWU4oyXW3npJlTUgUw77b8TkwCFMpaCbVB4sMVYy66WL1ojj67S2MHr8JoOuj6GZbT+rbmDs9Ek8Pp9XuAm67lhe0ZiWdN7jHAFt68bATSQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=IcXosOZ8Qr828w9y5V7z7FQT+ATTDDayUCpl2aryeq482kyafYgEEDF/1Ga7xx+xSL7EjXVhHQj5A28VdTx6T+kkBAQwyNxEVBDtrXV/rshIwFUxALiUydBbecnIbpWgq5YETF47o3dLkd0UrvWHnFgT0ypiBbfsCwS463hyoRmwM5Syv2+2PRkcvc+1c4ZD0trUE8CC7trOQHzaLNiLXGdst4drBD6gW+VBBZMHIrY25/1vuqJLbLnem9JBy/T9nHnY7ZIH0MImFHtgoDeKq/jXnmAIKVHFLUAN0iqOpi49eWo1OxRFs5Xm9WKTUVI6KYKrbzacj7ey2O5rJ4q2JA==
- Authentication-results: lists.xenproject.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;lists.xenproject.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=oracle.com;
- Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 16:06:41 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 4/12/21 5:50 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 09.04.2021 23:45, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 4/7/21 10:37 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> There's no point in comparing SBDF - we can simply compare the struct
>>> pci_dev pointers. If they weren't the same for a given device, we'd have
>>> bigger problems from having stored a stale pointer.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Thanks. As the 1st patch of this series still looks to have an unclear
> disposition (unless not getting back a reply on my responses to your
> comments means silent agreement),
TBH I have been struggling with understanding both the original problem (just
like you have) and the solution you are proposing (apart from making dev_list[]
more compact).
> I can't predict yet when I'd be able
> to submit v2. Hence I'd like to point out that this patch is
> independent of the former two, and hence would need to wait further if
> you wanted to apply it. After all this one (unlike the other two) is
> merely cleanup, and hence would rather want to go in during a merge
> window.
Given that next Sunday may be when 5.12 is released I think everything but
stoppers will have to wait for the merge window.
-boris
|
