On 8/17/2022 7:23 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 10:43:23AM +0530, Abhishek Sahu wrote: > >> +static int >> +vfio_pci_core_pm_entry_with_wakeup(struct vfio_device *device, u32 flags, >> + void __user *arg, size_t argsz) > > This should be > struct vfio_device_low_power_entry_with_wakeup __user *arg > Thanks Jason. I can update this. But if we look the existing code, for example (vfio_ioctl_device_feature_mig_device_state()), then there it still uses 'void __user *arg' only. Is this a new guideline which we need to take care ? >> @@ -1336,6 +1389,9 @@ int vfio_pci_core_ioctl_feature(struct vfio_device *device, u32 flags, >> return vfio_pci_core_feature_token(device, flags, arg, argsz); >> case VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_LOW_POWER_ENTRY: >> return vfio_pci_core_pm_entry(device, flags, arg, argsz); >> + case VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_LOW_POWER_ENTRY_WITH_WAKEUP: >> + return vfio_pci_core_pm_entry_with_wakeup(device, flags, >> + arg, argsz); >> case VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_LOW_POWER_EXIT: >> return vfio_pci_core_pm_exit(device, flags, arg, argsz); > > Best to keep these ioctls sorted > > Jason Do we need to keep the IOCTL name alphabetically sorted in the case list. Currently, I have added in the order of IOCTL numbers. Regards, Abhishek
