Re: [v4 01/16] KVM: Extend struct pi_desc for VT-d Posted-Interrupts

On 24/06/2015 07:42, Wu, Feng wrote: > Do you mean we don't use bitfields at all, or the following format is > acceptable, in which, we use bitfileds as less as possible? > union { > struct > { > u16 on : 1, /* bit 256 - Outstanding Notification */ >

RE: [v4 01/16] KVM: Extend struct pi_desc for VT-d Posted-Interrupts

t: Re: [v4 01/16] KVM: Extend struct pi_desc for VT-d Posted-Interrupts > > > > On 11/06/2015 12:51, Feng Wu wrote: > > + union { > > + struct { > > + /* bit 256 - Outstanding Notification */ > > + u64

Re: [v4 01/16] KVM: Extend struct pi_desc for VT-d Posted-Interrupts

On 11/06/2015 12:51, Feng Wu wrote: > + union { > + struct { > + /* bit 256 - Outstanding Notification */ > + u64 on : 1, > + /* bit 257 - Suppress Notification */ > +

[v4 01/16] KVM: Extend struct pi_desc for VT-d Posted-Interrupts

Extend struct pi_desc for VT-d Posted-Interrupts. Signed-off-by: Feng Wu --- arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 20 ++-- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c index f7b6168..bd26501 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c +++ b/arch/x86/