[libvirt] [PATCH v5 01/13] conf: Add definitions for 'uid' and 'fid' PCI address attributes

[Andrea Bolognani]

On Tue, 2018-09-04 at 16:39 +0800, Yi Min Zhao wrote:
> Add zPCI definitions in preparation of extending the PCI address
> with parameters uid (user-defined identifier) and fid (PCI function
> identifier).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yi Min Zhao <zyimin at linux.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Boris Fiuczynski <fiuczy at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Stefan Zimmermann <stzi at linux.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Bjoern Walk <bwalk at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko at redhat.com>

[...]
> +typedef struct _virZPCIDeviceAddress virZPCIDeviceAddress;
> +typedef virZPCIDeviceAddress *virZPCIDeviceAddressPtr;
> +struct _virZPCIDeviceAddress {
> +    unsigned int uid; /* exempt from syntax-check */
> +    unsigned int fid;
> +};
> +
>  struct _virPCIDeviceAddress {
>      unsigned int domain;
>      unsigned int bus;
>      unsigned int slot;
>      unsigned int function;
>      int multi; /* virTristateSwitch */
> +    virZPCIDeviceAddress zpci;
>  };

As mentioned during an earlier review, virPCIDeviceAddress
should itself include a virDomainPCIAddressExtensionFlags
so that it would be possible to know whether zpci should be
taken into account without having to look at other structs.
Perhaps virPCIDeviceAddressExtensionFlags would be a more
appropriate name then?


An aside. I see you've carried over Jano's R-b from v2;
given that the patch has changed substantially since then,
I don't think it's fair to assume he'd stand behind the
current incarnation just as he did originally. IMHO you
should just drop R-bs when posting a new version, unless
the patch is unchanged or the changes made are trivial.

-- 
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization