"Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:26:10AM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: >> >> We already do the test for msix on the caller, just use that test >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >> > >> > NAK >> > >> > I think we are better off not making assumptions >> > about caller behaviour in msix.c, virtio >> > will not be the only user forever. >> >> That makes migration testing more difficult. Basically we are testing >> if we are using msix in two places. Obvious thing is: >> - we don't test in msix_save() if msix is used. >> - we don't test it in virtio_pci_save_config() >> >> I don't care if it is one way or another, but requiring to check it in >> the caller and the callee is a bit too much for me. >> >> Later, Juan. > > msix does not require the check in the caller, by design it is > safe to call msix_save when msix is not present.
look at it, it requires to test msix support for other things, which amount to the same thing :( Later, Juan.
