From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>,
Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 RFC 0/6] x86/MSI: XSA-120, 126, 128-131 follow-up
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:38:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <558839ED02000078000879FE@mail.emea.novell.com> (raw)
Only patches 1, 2, and 6 are really RFC (with some debugging code still
left in), the others (hence v4) have been submitted before.
1: PCI: add config space write abstract intercept logic
2: MSI-X: track host and guest mask-all requests separately
3: MSI-X: be more careful during teardown
4: MSI-X: access MSI-X table only after having enabled MSI-X
5: MSI-X: reduce fiddling with control register during restore
6: MSI: properly track guest masking requests
A fundamental question is whether to go without the so far missing
(and more involved) MMCFG intercepts. This largely depends
whether there are any half way recent Dom0 OSes using MMCFG
accesses for the base 256 bytes of PCI config space.
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
next reply other threads:[~2015-06-22 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-22 14:38 Jan Beulich [this message]
2015-06-22 14:46 ` [PATCH v4 RFC 1/6] x86/PCI: add config space write abstract intercept logic Jan Beulich
2015-06-22 19:31 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-06-23 7:21 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-23 11:06 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-06-23 12:55 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-24 17:09 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-06-22 14:47 ` [PATCH v4 RFC 2/6] x86/MSI-X: track host and guest mask‑all requests separately Jan Beulich
2015-06-24 17:15 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-06-25 8:01 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-25 14:25 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-06-22 14:49 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] x86/MSI-X: be more careful during teardown Jan Beulich
2015-06-22 14:50 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] x86/MSI-X: access MSI-X table only after having enabled MSI-X Jan Beulich
2015-06-22 14:51 ` [PATCH v4 RFC 5/6] x86/MSI-X: reduce fiddling with control register during restore Jan Beulich
2015-06-22 14:51 ` [PATCH v4 RFC 6/6] x86/MSI: properly track guest masking requests Jan Beulich
2015-06-24 17:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-06-25 8:04 ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-25 14:26 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-06-25 14:49 ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-13 11:42 ` [PATCH v4 RFC 0/6] x86/MSI: XSA-120, 126, 128-131 follow-up Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=558839ED02000078000879FE@mail.emea.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).