On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 01:13:36AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 10/11/19 9:01 AM, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > Some might actually care about the return value of dma_memory_rw. So
> > let us pass it along instead of ignoring it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Klaus Jensen <k.jen...@samsung.com>
> > ---
> > include/hw/pci/pci.h | 3 +--
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/hw/pci/pci.h b/include/hw/pci/pci.h
> > index f3f0ffd5fb78..4e95bb847857 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/pci/pci.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/pci/pci.h
> > @@ -779,8 +779,7 @@ static inline AddressSpace
> > *pci_get_address_space(PCIDevice *dev)
> > static inline int pci_dma_rw(PCIDevice *dev, dma_addr_t addr,
> > void *buf, dma_addr_t len, DMADirection dir)
> > {
> > - dma_memory_rw(pci_get_address_space(dev), addr, buf, len, dir);
> > - return 0;
> > + return dma_memory_rw(pci_get_address_space(dev), addr, buf, len, dir);
> > }
> > static inline int pci_dma_read(PCIDevice *dev, dma_addr_t addr,
> >
>
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com>
Gentle ping on this.
This fix is required for the nvme device to start passing some of the
nasty tests from blktests that flips bus mastering while doing I/O.
Cheers,
Klaus
