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.