Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org
Signed-off-by: Li Qiang <liq3ea@gmail.com>
---
util/vfio-helpers.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/util/vfio-helpers.c b/util/vfio-helpers.c
index cccc9cd42e..342d4a2285 100644
--- a/util/vfio-helpers.c
+++ b/util/vfio-helpers.c
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static int qemu_vfio_init_pci(QEMUVFIOState *s, const char *device,
goto fail;
}
- for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->bar_region_info); i++) {
ret = qemu_vfio_pci_init_bar(s, i, errp);
if (ret) {
goto fail;
--
2.11.0
On 30/11/18 10:53, Li Qiang wrote:
> Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Qiang <liq3ea@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> ---
> util/vfio-helpers.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/util/vfio-helpers.c b/util/vfio-helpers.c
> index cccc9cd42e..342d4a2285 100644
> --- a/util/vfio-helpers.c
> +++ b/util/vfio-helpers.c
> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static int qemu_vfio_init_pci(QEMUVFIOState *s, const char *device,
> goto fail;
> }
>
> - for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->bar_region_info); i++) {
> ret = qemu_vfio_pci_init_bar(s, i, errp);
> if (ret) {
> goto fail;
>
On 30/11/2018 13:01, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 30/11/18 10:53, Li Qiang wrote:
>> Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Li Qiang <liq3ea@gmail.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
>
>> ---
>> util/vfio-helpers.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/util/vfio-helpers.c b/util/vfio-helpers.c
>> index cccc9cd42e..342d4a2285 100644
>> --- a/util/vfio-helpers.c
>> +++ b/util/vfio-helpers.c
>> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static int qemu_vfio_init_pci(QEMUVFIOState *s, const char *device,
>> goto fail;
>> }
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->bar_region_info); i++) {
>> ret = qemu_vfio_pci_init_bar(s, i, errp);
>> if (ret) {
>> goto fail;
>>
I'm wondering if adding a #define to define the size of the array and
then using it with the for() loop wouldn't be better?
Laurent
30.11.2018 15:58, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>> - for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
>>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->bar_region_info); i++) {
> I'm wondering if adding a #define to define the size of the array and
> then using it with the for() loop wouldn't be better?
On the other side, it doesn't really matter, one way or another..
It's so.. trivial.. ;)
/mjt
Le 30/11/2018 à 10:53, Li Qiang a écrit :
> Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Qiang <liq3ea@gmail.com>
> ---
> util/vfio-helpers.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/util/vfio-helpers.c b/util/vfio-helpers.c
> index cccc9cd42e..342d4a2285 100644
> --- a/util/vfio-helpers.c
> +++ b/util/vfio-helpers.c
> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ static int qemu_vfio_init_pci(QEMUVFIOState *s, const char *device,
> goto fail;
> }
>
> - for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(s->bar_region_info); i++) {
> ret = qemu_vfio_pci_init_bar(s, i, errp);
> if (ret) {
> goto fail;
>
Applied to my trivial-patches branch.
Thanks,
Laurent
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.