| Message ID | 20210923125438.234162-8-andr2000@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | PCI devices passthrough on Arm, part 2 | expand |
+x86 maintainers On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: > From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com> > > The PCI device remove path may now be used by PVH on ARM, so the > assert is no longer valid. > > Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com> > Cc: Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org> > Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> > > --- > tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c b/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c > index 1a1c2630803b..59f3686fc85e 100644 > --- a/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c > +++ b/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c > @@ -1947,8 +1947,6 @@ static void do_pci_remove(libxl__egc *egc, pci_remove_state *prs) > goto out_fail; > } > } else { > - assert(type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV); This is fine for ARM, but is it OK from an x86 point of view considering the PVH implications? > char *sysfs_path = GCSPRINTF(SYSFS_PCI_DEV"/"PCI_BDF"/resource", pci->domain, > pci->bus, pci->dev, pci->func); > FILE *f = fopen(sysfs_path, "r"); > -- > 2.25.1 >
On 25.09.21 03:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > +x86 maintainers > > On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >> From: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com> >> >> The PCI device remove path may now be used by PVH on ARM, so the >> assert is no longer valid. >> >> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Andrushchenko <oleksandr_andrushchenko@epam.com> >> Cc: Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org> >> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> >> >> --- >> tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c | 2 -- >> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c b/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c >> index 1a1c2630803b..59f3686fc85e 100644 >> --- a/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c >> +++ b/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c >> @@ -1947,8 +1947,6 @@ static void do_pci_remove(libxl__egc *egc, pci_remove_state *prs) >> goto out_fail; >> } >> } else { >> - assert(type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV); > This is fine for ARM, but is it OK from an x86 point of view considering > the PVH implications? Long time ago I was asking Roger about that. At first glance the change seemed to be ok, but Roger could you please confirm this? Thank you in advance, Oleksandr > > >> char *sysfs_path = GCSPRINTF(SYSFS_PCI_DEV"/"PCI_BDF"/resource", pci->domain, >> pci->bus, pci->dev, pci->func); >> FILE *f = fopen(sysfs_path, "r"); >> -- >> 2.25.1 >>
diff --git a/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c b/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c index 1a1c2630803b..59f3686fc85e 100644 --- a/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c +++ b/tools/libs/light/libxl_pci.c @@ -1947,8 +1947,6 @@ static void do_pci_remove(libxl__egc *egc, pci_remove_state *prs) goto out_fail; } } else { - assert(type == LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PV); - char *sysfs_path = GCSPRINTF(SYSFS_PCI_DEV"/"PCI_BDF"/resource", pci->domain, pci->bus, pci->dev, pci->func); FILE *f = fopen(sysfs_path, "r");