11 Nov
2025
11 Nov
'25
5:09 p.m.
On Tue, 11 Nov 2025 06:52:02 -0800 Alex Mastro amastro@fb.com wrote:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vfio/lib/vfio_pci_device.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vfio/lib/vfio_pci_device.c index a381fd253aa7..7a523e3f2dce 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vfio/lib/vfio_pci_device.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vfio/lib/vfio_pci_device.c @@ -29,6 +29,173 @@ VFIO_ASSERT_EQ(__ret, 0, "ioctl(%s, %s, %s) returned %d\n", #_fd, #_op, #_arg, __ret); \ } while (0) +static struct vfio_info_cap_header *next_cap_hdr(void *buf, size_t bufsz,
size_t *cap_offset)+{
- struct vfio_info_cap_header *hdr;
- if (!*cap_offset)
return NULL;- VFIO_ASSERT_LT(*cap_offset, bufsz);
- VFIO_ASSERT_GE(bufsz - *cap_offset, sizeof(*hdr));
- hdr = (struct vfio_info_cap_header *)((u8 *)buf + *cap_offset);
- if (hdr->next)
VFIO_ASSERT_GT(hdr->next, *cap_offset);
This might be implementation, but I don't think it's a requirement. The vfio capability chains are based on PCI capabilities, which have no ordering requirement. Thanks,
Alex
- *cap_offset = hdr->next;
- return hdr;
+}