Nikos Dragazis <[email protected]> writes:
> On 17/9/20 7:34 μ.μ., Alex Bennée wrote: > >> Nikos Dragazis <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> Shared memory and vendor-specific configuration structures have been >>> introduced in previous commits. >>> >>> Update the list of virtio configuration structures so that it includes >>> the shared memory and vendor-specific configuration structures. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nikos Dragazis <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> content.tex | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex >>> index 3ce768c..b5b2f79 100644 >>> --- a/content.tex >>> +++ b/content.tex >>> @@ -634,6 +634,8 @@ \subsection{Virtio Structure PCI >>> Capabilities}\label{sec:Virtio Transport Option >>> \item ISR Status >>> \item Device-specific configuration (optional) >>> \item PCI configuration access >>> +\item Shared memory regions (optional) >>> +\item Vendor-specific data (optional) >> Are we talking about "Vendor data capability" here? > > Yep. > >> Maybe we should call it that? > > I would avoid using the word "capability" here because the items in this > list are referred to as "structures". ACK for s/Vendor-specific/Vendor. > In general, I see that the wording in this section is not consistent in > the sense that the terms "configuration structure" and "capability" are > used interchangeably. I have a mild preference for configuration structure - but a greater preference for consistency. > >> >>> \end{itemize} >>> >>> Each structure can be mapped by a Base Address register (BAR) belonging to >> -- Alex Bennée --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
