On 02/19/2016 04:18 PM, Wei Yang wrote: > Even PCI_CAP_FLAGS has the same value as PCI_MSIX_FLAGS, the later one is > the more proper on retrieving MSIX entries. > > This patch uses PCI_MSIX_FLAGS to retrieve the MSIX entries. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiy...@gmail.com> > CC: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> > CC: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> > --- > hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > index 132588b..9d40039 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c > @@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ static int s390_pcihost_setup_msix(S390PCIBusDevice > *pbdev) > return 0; > } > > - ctrl = pci_host_config_read_common(pbdev->pdev, pos + PCI_CAP_FLAGS, > + ctrl = pci_host_config_read_common(pbdev->pdev, pos + PCI_MSIX_FLAGS, > pci_config_size(pbdev->pdev), sizeof(ctrl)); > table = pci_host_config_read_common(pbdev->pdev, pos + PCI_MSIX_TABLE, > pci_config_size(pbdev->pdev), sizeof(table)); >
looks sane. Yi Min, can you ack/nack?
