Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 15/17] x86/hvm: use ioreq_t to track in-flight state

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 24.06.15 at 13:24, <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Use an ioreq_t rather than open coded state, size, dir and data fields
> in struct hvm_vcpu_io. This also allows PIO completion to be handled
> similarly to MMIO completion by re-issuing the handle_pio() call.

Aren't you referring to ...

> @@ -501,11 +501,12 @@ void hvm_do_resume(struct vcpu *v)
>          (void)handle_mmio();

... this one as the reference?

>          break;
>      case HVMIO_pio_completion:
> -        if ( vio->io_size == 4 ) /* Needs zero extension. */
> -            guest_cpu_user_regs()->rax = (uint32_t)vio->io_data;
> +        if ( vio->io_req.size == 4 ) /* Needs zero extension. */
> +            guest_cpu_user_regs()->rax = (uint32_t)vio->io_req.data;
>          else
> -            memcpy(&guest_cpu_user_regs()->rax, &vio->io_data, vio->io_size);
> -        vio->io_state = STATE_IOREQ_NONE;
> +            memcpy(&guest_cpu_user_regs()->rax, &vio->io_req.data,
> +                   vio->io_req.size);
> +        vio->io_req.state = STATE_IOREQ_NONE;
>          break;

I.e. shouldn't I expect to see a handle_pio() call here? Or where
else is this new handle_pio() call going to show up?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel