[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190201164401.GT32526@8bytes.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 17:44:01 +0100
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ntb@...glegroups.com,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Allen Hubbe <allenbh@...il.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
Eric Pilmore <epilmore@...aio.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] iommu/vt-d: Allow interrupts from the entire bus for
aliased devices
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:56:48AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> @@ -394,6 +402,10 @@ static int set_msi_sid(struct irte *irte, struct pci_dev *dev)
> set_irte_sid(irte, SVT_VERIFY_BUS, SQ_ALL_16,
> PCI_DEVID(PCI_BUS_NUM(data.alias),
> dev->bus->number));
> + else if (data.count >= 2 && data.busmatch_count == data.count)
> + set_irte_sid(irte, SVT_VERIFY_BUS, SQ_ALL_16,
> + PCI_DEVID(dev->bus->number,
> + dev->bus->number));
The dev->bus->number argument for the devfn parameter of PCI_DEVID is
not needed, right?
Also, this requires at least a comment to document that special case.
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists