>>> Roger Pau Monne 06/26/17 1:51 PM >>>
>Let me know whether do you consider having this patch to mask
>MSI/MSI-X capabilities on user request for Dom0 is helpful or not.
If the capability hiding was needed for anything else, I could see what
you're doing here as a potentially helpful by-product
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 06:49:50AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 27.04.17 at 16:35, wrote:
> > Add traps to each capability PCI_CAP_LIST_NEXT field in order to mask them
> > on
> > request.
> >
> > All capabilities from the device are fetched and stored in an internal list,
> > that's later
>>> On 27.04.17 at 16:35, wrote:
> +static int vpci_index_capabilities(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> +uint8_t seg = pdev->seg, bus = pdev->bus;
> +uint8_t slot = PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn), func = PCI_FUNC(pdev->devfn);
> +uint8_t pos = PCI_CAPABILITY_LIST;
> +uint16_t status;
> +uns
>>> On 27.04.17 at 16:35, wrote:
> Add traps to each capability PCI_CAP_LIST_NEXT field in order to mask them on
> request.
>
> All capabilities from the device are fetched and stored in an internal list,
> that's later used in order to return the next capability to the guest. Note
> that this on
Add traps to each capability PCI_CAP_LIST_NEXT field in order to mask them on
request.
All capabilities from the device are fetched and stored in an internal list,
that's later used in order to return the next capability to the guest. Note
that this only removes the capability from the linked list
