Note: Corrected the Subject. > On 07/09/22, 8:50 PM, "Vitaly Kuznetsov" <vkuzn...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/common.c b/arch/x86/pci/common.c >> index ddb7986..1e5a8f7 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/pci/common.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/common.c >> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ >> #include <asm/pci_x86.h> >> #include <asm/setup.h> >> #include <asm/irqdomain.h> >> +#include <asm/hypervisor.h> >> >> unsigned int pci_probe = PCI_PROBE_BIOS | PCI_PROBE_CONF1 | PCI_PROBE_CONF2 >> | >> PCI_PROBE_MMCONF; >> @@ -57,14 +58,58 @@ int raw_pci_write(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus, >> unsigned int devfn, >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_HYPERVISOR_GUEST >> +static int vm_raw_pci_read(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus, unsigned >> int devfn, >> + int reg, int len, u32 *val) >> +{ >> + if (raw_pci_ext_ops) >> + return raw_pci_ext_ops->read(domain, bus, devfn, reg, len, >> val); >> + if (domain == 0 && reg < 256 && raw_pci_ops) >> + return raw_pci_ops->read(domain, bus, devfn, reg, len, val); >> + return -EINVAL; >> +} >> + >> +static int vm_raw_pci_write(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus, unsigned >> int devfn, >> + int reg, int len, u32 val) >> +{ >> + if (raw_pci_ext_ops) >> + return raw_pci_ext_ops->write(domain, bus, devfn, reg, len, >> val); >> + if (domain == 0 && reg < 256 && raw_pci_ops) >> + return raw_pci_ops->write(domain, bus, devfn, reg, len, val); >> + return -EINVAL; >> +} > > These look exactly like raw_pci_read()/raw_pci_write() but with inverted > priority. We could've added a parameter but to be more flexible, I'd > suggest we add a 'priority' field to 'struct pci_raw_ops' and make > raw_pci_read()/raw_pci_write() check it before deciding what to use > first. To be on the safe side, you can leave raw_pci_ops's priority > higher than raw_pci_ext_ops's by default and only tweak it in > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c
Thanks Vitaly for your response. 1. we have multiple objects of struct pci_raw_ops, 2. adding 'priority' field to struct pci_raw_ops doesn't seems to be appropriate as need to take decision which object of struct pci_raw_ops has to be used, not something with-in struct pci_raw_ops. It's a generic solution for all hypervisor (sorry for earlier wrong Subject), not specific to VMware. Further looking for feedback if it's impacting to any hypervisor. -Ajay