From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [v7][PATCH 15/16] xen/vtd: prevent from assign the
 device with shared rmrr
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 10:19:52 +0100
Message-ID: <55A4F0580200007800090810@mail.emea.novell.com>
References: <1436420047-25356-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<1436420047-25356-16-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<55A3DC29020000780009037A@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<55A468FE.1020100@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <55A468FE.1020100@intel.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 14.07.15 at 03:42, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> > +            {
>>> +                printk(XENLOG_G_ERR VTDPREFIX
>>> +                       " cannot assign %04x:%02x:%02x.%u"
>>> +                       " with shared RMRR for Dom%d.\n",
>>> +                       seg, bus, PCI_SLOT(devfn), PCI_FUNC(devfn),
>>> +                       d->domain_id);
>>> +                return -EPERM;
>>> +            }
>>> +        }
>>
>> Two if()-s like these should be folded into one.
>>
>> In your place I'd also consider also printing the RMRR base address
>> for easier analysis of the issue.
>>
> 
> I agree but I think the whole range info should be better,
> 
> " with shared RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64"] for Dom%d.\n",

Perhaps, albeit due to there not being overlapping RMRRs the
base address is sufficient for uniquely identifying the one in
question.

Jan