30 Jun
2017
30 Jun
'17
4:58 a.m.
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:48:36 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 20:03 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
[...]
That's worked out just fine so far, because zero was a sensible default value for all existing fields; however, when implementing isolation groups, we add a new virDomainDeviceInfo::isolationGroup field which we need to be initialized to -1 instead so that it doesn't overlap with IOMMU group 0 mentioned above.
Or we could just, you know, do the sensible thing and store (IOMMU group + 1) instead of (IOMMU group) in
How is that sensible? That looks as a source of bugs in the long run.