On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 12:48:00PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 01.12.2023 16:45, Stewart Hildebrand wrote:
> > --- a/xen/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > +++ b/xen/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > @@ -39,31 +39,42 @@ unsigned int pci_find_cap_offset(pci_sbdf_t sbdf,
> > unsigned int cap)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -unsigned int pci_find_next_cap(pci_sbdf_t sbdf, unsigned int pos,
> > - unsigned int cap)
> > +unsigned int pci_find_next_cap_ttl(pci_sbdf_t sbdf, unsigned int pos,
> > + const unsigned int *cap, unsigned int n,
>
> Imo this would better be written as cap[] (or even caps[]).
>
> > @@ -545,6 +546,68 @@ static int cf_check init_bars(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > if ( rc )
> > return rc;
> >
> > + if ( !is_hardware_domain(pdev->domain) )
> > + {
> > + if ( pci_conf_read16(pdev->sbdf, PCI_STATUS) & PCI_STATUS_CAP_LIST
> > )
> > + {
> > + /* Only expose capabilities to the guest that vPCI can handle.
> > */
> > + unsigned int next, ttl = 48;
> > + const unsigned int supported_caps[] = {
> > + PCI_CAP_ID_MSI,
> > + PCI_CAP_ID_MSIX,
> > + };
>
> static?
>
> With the two adjustments
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
FTAOD: please also keep my RB when doing those adjustments.
Thanks, Roger.
