On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:48:36 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 20:03 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: [...] > > That's worked out just fine so far, because zero was a > > sensible default value for all existing fields; however, > > when implementing isolation groups, we add a new > > virDomainDeviceInfo::isolationGroup field which we need > > to be initialized to -1 instead so that it doesn't overlap > > with IOMMU group 0 mentioned above. > > Or we could just, you know, do the sensible thing and > store (IOMMU group + 1) instead of (IOMMU group) in How is that sensible? That looks as a source of bugs in the long run.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
