On 13.10.2021 15:51, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 10:52:15AM +0300, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >> --- a/xen/drivers/vpci/header.c >> +++ b/xen/drivers/vpci/header.c >> @@ -445,6 +445,55 @@ static void rom_write(const struct pci_dev *pdev, >> unsigned int reg, >> rom->addr = val & PCI_ROM_ADDRESS_MASK; >> } >> >> +static int add_bar_handlers(const struct pci_dev *pdev) > > Making this const is again misleading IMO, as you end up modifying > fields inside the pdev, you get away with it because vpci data is > stored in a pointer.
I think it was me who asked for const to be added in places like this one. vpci data hanging off of struct pci_dev is an implementation artifact imo, not an unavoidable connection. In principle the vpci data corresponding to a physical device could also be looked up using e.g. SBDF. Here the intention really is to leave the physical device unchanged; that's what the const documents (apart from enforcing). Jan
