[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] driver/pci: Get next capability without passing caps


  • To: "Chen, Jiqian" <Jiqian.Chen@xxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:00:10 +0200
  • Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
  • Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Orzel, Michal" <Michal.Orzel@xxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Huang, Ray" <Ray.Huang@xxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:00:25 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 11.04.2025 04:51, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2025/4/10 20:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 09.04.2025 08:45, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>> +++ b/xen/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ unsigned int pci_find_cap_offset(pci_sbdf_t sbdf, 
>>> unsigned int cap)
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  unsigned int pci_find_next_cap_ttl(pci_sbdf_t sbdf, unsigned int pos,
>>> -                                   const unsigned int caps[], unsigned int 
>>> n,
>>> +                                   const unsigned int *caps, unsigned int 
>>> n,
>>
>> I don't follow the need for this change.
> This changed is for my next patch "vpci/header: Emulate legacy capability 
> list for host".
> Currently, vpci only emulates capability list for domU, not for dom0.
> For domU, vpci exposes a fixed capability array which calls "supported_caps".
> My changes want to emulate capability list for dom0.
> I think vpci should expose all devices capabilities to dom0.
> When I emulate it, I need to iterate over all capabilities without another 
> fixed array,
> so I need this function to return the position of next capability directly 
> when passing a zero length array to this function.

This doesn't answer my question. The change you need for the next patch is
the hunk below, not the one above. Aiui at least.

>>> @@ -55,6 +55,10 @@ unsigned int pci_find_next_cap_ttl(pci_sbdf_t sbdf, 
>>> unsigned int pos,
>>>  
>>>          if ( id == 0xff )
>>>              break;
>>> +
>>> +        if ( !caps || n == 0 )
>>> +            return pos;
>>
>> Checking n to be zero ought to suffice here? In that case it doesn't matter
>> what caps is. Plus if n is non-zero, it clearly is an error if caps was NULL.
> Two checking is to prevent null pointer errors.
> But as you said, if checking n to be zero is enough, then I don't need to 
> change the definition of this function.
> I will change in next version.

If you really wanted to, you could add e.g. ASSERT(caps) after this if().

Jan



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.