Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> writes:
> Use pci_rom_bar_explicitly_enabled() to determine if rombar is explicitly
> enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com>
> ---
> hw/vfio/pci.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/pci.c b/hw/vfio/pci.c
> index 4fa387f0430d..647f15b2a060 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/pci.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/pci.c
> @@ -1012,7 +1012,6 @@ static void vfio_pci_size_rom(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev)
> {
> uint32_t orig, size = cpu_to_le32((uint32_t)PCI_ROM_ADDRESS_MASK);
> off_t offset = vdev->config_offset + PCI_ROM_ADDRESS;
> - DeviceState *dev = DEVICE(vdev);
> char *name;
> int fd = vdev->vbasedev.fd;
>
> @@ -1046,7 +1045,7 @@ static void vfio_pci_size_rom(VFIOPCIDevice *vdev)
> }
>
> if (vfio_opt_rom_in_denylist(vdev)) {
> - if (dev->opts && qdict_haskey(dev->opts, "rombar")) {
> + if (pci_rom_bar_explicitly_enabled(&vdev->pdev)) {
> warn_report("Device at %s is known to cause system instability"
> " issues during option rom execution",
> vdev->vbasedev.name);
Consider -device ...,rombar=0xffffffff.
Before the patch, the condition is true.
Afterwards, it's false.
Do we care?
