On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 02:46:50PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 11:43 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:32:16AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >Here's my new proposal:
> >
> > static int compute_max_vf_buses(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > {
> > struct p
On 10/28/2015 11:43 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:32:16AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
Hi Alex,
Thanks a lot for cleaning this up. I think this is a great
improvement over what I did.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 01:52:15PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
This patch pulls the v
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:32:16AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Thanks a lot for cleaning this up. I think this is a great
> improvement over what I did.
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 01:52:15PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > This patch pulls the validation of offset and stride in
On 10/28/2015 09:32 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
Hi Alex,
Thanks a lot for cleaning this up. I think this is a great
improvement over what I did.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 01:52:15PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
This patch pulls the validation of offset and stride into virtfn_max_buses.
The genera
Hi Alex,
Thanks a lot for cleaning this up. I think this is a great
improvement over what I did.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 01:52:15PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> This patch pulls the validation of offset and stride into virtfn_max_buses.
> The general idea is to validate offset and stride for
This patch pulls the validation of offset and stride into virtfn_max_buses.
The general idea is to validate offset and stride for each possible value
of numvfs in addition to still determining the maximum bus value for the
VFs.
I also reversed the loop as the most likely maximum will be when numvf
6 matches
Mail list logo
