> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Williamson [mailto:alex.williamson@redhat.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2021 7:04 AM
> To: Longpeng (Mike, Cloud Infrastructure Service Product Dept.)
> <longpeng2@huawei.com>
> Cc: philmd@redhat.com; pbonzini@redhat.com; marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com;
> mst@redhat.com; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Gonglei (Arei)
> <arei.gonglei@huawei.com>; chenjiashang <chenjiashang@huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/9] msix: simplify the conditional in
> msix_set/unset_vector_notifiers
>
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 07:01:57 +0800
> "Longpeng(Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> > 'msix_function_masked' is synchronized with the device's config,
> > we can use it to replace the complex conditional statementis in
> > msix_set/unset_vector_notifiers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Longpeng(Mike) <longpeng2@huawei.com>
> > ---
> > hw/pci/msix.c | 6 ++----
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/pci/msix.c b/hw/pci/msix.c
> > index ae9331cd0b..67682289af 100644
> > --- a/hw/pci/msix.c
> > +++ b/hw/pci/msix.c
> > @@ -592,8 +592,7 @@ int msix_set_vector_notifiers(PCIDevice *dev,
> > dev->msix_vector_release_notifier = release_notifier;
> > dev->msix_vector_poll_notifier = poll_notifier;
> >
> > - if ((dev->config[dev->msix_cap + MSIX_CONTROL_OFFSET] &
> > - (MSIX_ENABLE_MASK | MSIX_MASKALL_MASK)) == MSIX_ENABLE_MASK) {
> > + if (!dev->msix_function_masked) {
> > for (vector = 0; vector < dev->msix_entries_nr; vector++) {
> > ret = msix_set_notifier_for_vector(dev, vector);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > @@ -622,8 +621,7 @@ void msix_unset_vector_notifiers(PCIDevice *dev)
> > assert(dev->msix_vector_use_notifier &&
> > dev->msix_vector_release_notifier);
> >
> > - if ((dev->config[dev->msix_cap + MSIX_CONTROL_OFFSET] &
> > - (MSIX_ENABLE_MASK | MSIX_MASKALL_MASK)) == MSIX_ENABLE_MASK) {
> > + if (!dev->msix_function_masked) {
> > for (vector = 0; vector < dev->msix_entries_nr; vector++) {
> > msix_unset_notifier_for_vector(dev, vector);
> > }
>
> This appears to be a cleanup that's not required for the functionality
> of this series. I'd suggest proposing it separately. Same for the
> patch 5/9 in this series. If it makes a functional difference it
> should be described in the commit log. Thanks,
>
OK, will remove these two patches in the v4, thanks.
> Alex