On 5/17/24 04:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>> @@ -67,6 +68,41 @@ ret_t pci_physdev_op(int cmd,
>>> XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg)
>>> +pcidevs_lock();
>>> +pdev = pci_get_pdev(NULL, sbdf);
>>> +
On 17.05.2024 13:01, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/17 18:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.05.2024 12:00, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>>> On 2024/5/17 17:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen,
On 2024/5/17 18:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.05.2024 12:00, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>> On 2024/5/17 17:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich
On 17.05.2024 12:00, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/17 17:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>>> On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian
Hi Juergen:
On 2024/5/17 18:03, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 17.05.24 11:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>>> On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.05.2024 11:52,
On 17.05.24 11:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
struct physdev_pci_device {
/* IN */
On 2024/5/17 17:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>> On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>> struct physdev_pci_device {
On 17.05.2024 11:28, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>>> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
> struct physdev_pci_device {
> /* IN */
> uint16_t seg;
On 2024/5/17 16:20, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
>> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
struct physdev_pci_device {
/* IN */
uint16_t seg;
>>>
>>> Is re-using this struct for this new sub-op
On 17.05.2024 10:08, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>> struct physdev_pci_device {
>>> /* IN */
>>> uint16_t seg;
>>
>> Is re-using this struct for this new sub-op sufficient? IOW are all
>> possible resets equal,
On 2024/5/16 21:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>> @@ -67,6 +68,41 @@ ret_t pci_physdev_op(int cmd,
>> XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg)
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> +case PHYSDEVOP_pci_device_state_reset: {
>> +struct physdev_pci_device dev;
On 16.05.2024 11:52, Jiqian Chen wrote:
> @@ -67,6 +68,41 @@ ret_t pci_physdev_op(int cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void)
> arg)
> break;
> }
>
> +case PHYSDEVOP_pci_device_state_reset: {
> +struct physdev_pci_device dev;
> +struct pci_dev *pdev;
> +
When a device has been reset on dom0 side, the vpci on Xen
side won't get notification, so the cached state in vpci is
all out of date compare with the real device state.
To solve that problem, add a new hypercall to clear all vpci
device state. When the state of device is reset on dom0 side,
dom0
13 matches
Mail list logo