On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:06:15PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 20/04/2017 18:03, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:19:23 -0700 > > Richard Henderson <r...@twiddle.net> wrote: > > > >> On 04/19/2017 12:44 PM, Jose Ricardo Ziviani wrote: > >>> This patchset has two patches: > >>> [1] 8-byte writes to non-mapped MMIO are broken into pairs of 4-byte > >>> writes, this patch makes such pairs atomic. > >>> > >>> [2] Enable 8-byte accesses in vfio_region_write and vfio_region_read. > >>> > >>> Patches based on master. > >>> > >>> Jose Ricardo Ziviani (2): > >>> vfio: Set MemoryRegionOps:max_access_size and min_access_size > >>> vfio: enable 8-byte reads/writes to vfio > >>> > >>> hw/vfio/common.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > >>> > >> > >> I think these patches need to be squashed to be bisectable. > > > > No, I think it's fine. The point of patch 1/2 is to indicate that the > > hardware supports 8-byte accesses, which will still be broken into 2 > > 4-byte accesses because we don't yet set the implemented width beyond > > the default. The important part is that the mutex will now group the 4 > > byte access pair together rather than letting them get re-ordered. > > Patch 2/2 then implements native 8-byte access. I appreciate them > > being separate for this subtle nuance, but maybe I'm not seeing the > > same issue as you. Thanks, > ' > I agree, the patches looks fine as is. > > Paolo >
Hello! Thank you all for your review but I have a quick question: is it ok for merge? :) Thanks
