> -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 8:04 AM > To: Rose, Gregory V > Cc: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx; Jesse > Barnes; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gospo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux- > pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [net-next 1/8] pci: Add flag indicating device has been > assigned by KVM > > On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 07:41 -0700, Rose, Gregory V wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 12:28 AM > > > To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T > > > Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx; Jesse Barnes; Rose, > > > Gregory V; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gospo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux- > > > pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: [net-next 1/8] pci: Add flag indicating device has been > > > assigned by KVM > > > > > > I suppose by that measure the comment could be less KVM specific: > > > > + /* Provide indication device is assigned by KVM */ > > > > + PCI_DEV_FLAGS_ASSIGNED = (__force pci_dev_flags_t) 4, > > > > We can resubmit with a more generic comment, maybe this: > > > > /* Provide indication device is assigned by a Virtual Machine Manager */ > > Sounds good to me. Dave, Jeff, Should I resubmit the patch or would it be more convenient to post a follow on patch that fixes up the comment? Either way is fine by me. - Greg ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���"�)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
