On 25.02.2026 00:12, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> From: Steven Noonan <[email protected]>
>
> This function should only be used for the hardware domain, because it
> compares addresses against the host e820 map.
The same is true for its sibling function, pci_check_bar(). For both the
question is whether skipping is the right thing, or whether for DomU-s
checking against their memory map is what is needed instead.
> --- a/xen/drivers/vpci/header.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/vpci/header.c
> @@ -394,13 +394,15 @@ static int modify_bars(const struct pci_dev *pdev,
> uint16_t cmd, bool rom_only)
> }
> }
>
> - rc = pci_sanitize_bar_memory(bar->mem);
> - if ( rc )
> - {
> - gprintk(XENLOG_WARNING,
> - "%pp: failed to sanitize BAR#%u memory: %d\n",
> - &pdev->sbdf, i, rc);
> - return rc;
> + if (is_hardware_domain(pdev->domain)) {
Nit: Style (see surrounding code you alter).
> + rc = pci_sanitize_bar_memory(mem);
> + if ( rc )
> + {
> + gprintk(XENLOG_WARNING,
> + "%pp: failed to sanitize BAR#%u memory: %d\n",
> + &pdev->sbdf, i, rc);
> + return rc;
> + }
To avoid the need for re-indentation here (reducing churn) you may want
to leverage that rc is 0 ahead of the call to pci_sanitize_bar_memory().
I.e. you could make just the call conditional, without touching anything
else.
Jan
