On Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:56:32 -0600
Alex Williamson <alex.william...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:19:08 +0530
> Kirti Wankhede <kwankh...@nvidia.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/linux-headers/linux/vfio.h b/linux-headers/linux/vfio.h
> > index 24f505199f83..6696a4600545 100644
> > --- a/linux-headers/linux/vfio.h
> > +++ b/linux-headers/linux/vfio.h
> > @@ -372,6 +372,172 @@ struct vfio_region_gfx_edid {
> > */
> > #define VFIO_REGION_SUBTYPE_IBM_NVLINK2_ATSD (1)
> >
> > +/* Migration region type and sub-type */
> > +#define VFIO_REGION_TYPE_MIGRATION (2)
>
> Region type #2 is already claimed by VFIO_REGION_TYPE_CCW, so this would
> need to be #3 or greater (we should have a reference table somewhere in
> this header as it gets easier to miss claimed entries as the sprawl
> grows).
I agree, this is too easy to miss. I came up with "vfio: re-arrange
vfio region definitions" (<20190717114956.16263-1-coh...@redhat.com>),
maybe that helps a bit.
