Hi Jon,
Thank you for all the work here!
Just a number of suggestions, mainly nitpicks, so feel free to ignore
these, of course.
[...]
> +#define VMCFG_MSI_RMP_DIS 0x2
[...]
What about calling this VMCONFIG_MSI_REMAP so that is more
self-explanatory (it also shares some similarity with the
PCI_REG_VMCONFIG defintition).
[...]
> + VMD_FEAT_BYPASS_MSI_REMAP = (1 << 4),
[...]
Following on the naming that included "HAS" to indicate a feature (or
support for thereof), perhaps we could name this as, for example:
VMD_FEAT_CAN_BYPASS_MSI_REMAP
What do you think?
[...]
> +static void vmd_enable_msi_remapping(struct vmd_dev *vmd, bool enable)
> +{
> + u16 reg;
> +
> + pci_read_config_word(vmd->dev, PCI_REG_VMCONFIG, ®);
> + reg = enable ? (reg & ~VMCFG_MSI_RMP_DIS) : (reg | VMCFG_MSI_RMP_DIS);
> + pci_write_config_word(vmd->dev, PCI_REG_VMCONFIG, reg);
> +}
I wonder if calling this function vmd_set_msi_remapping() would be more
aligned with what it does, since it turns the MSI remapping support on
and off, so to speak, as needed. Do you think this would be OK to do?
[...]
> + /*
> + * Override the irq domain bus token so the domain can be
> + * distinguished from a regular PCI/MSI domain.
> + */
It would be "IRQ" here.
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@xxxxxxxxx>
Krzysztof
