Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "arch_accept_virtio_features".
2020 Jul 06
1
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...ed if VERSION_1 has not been
> >> negotiated, I think.
>
>
> would be something like:
>
> - if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
> - return 0;
> + if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) {
> + ret = arch_accept_virtio_features(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_warn(&dev->dev,
> + "virtio: device must provide
> VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
That looks wrong; I think we want to validate in al...
2020 Jul 02
2
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On 2020-06-29 18:05, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:57:14 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:43:57PM +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host
>>> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the
2020 Jul 02
2
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On 2020-06-29 18:05, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:57:14 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:43:57PM +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host
>>> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the
2020 Jul 06
0
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
...t; also needs to fail when this feature is needed if VERSION_1 has not been
>> negotiated, I think.
would be something like:
- if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1))
- return 0;
+ if (!virtio_has_feature(dev, VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1)) {
+ ret = arch_accept_virtio_features(dev);
+ if (ret)
+ dev_warn(&dev->dev,
+ "virtio: device must provide
VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1\n");
+ return ret;
+ }
just a thought on the function name:
It becomes more general than just IOMMU_PLA...