[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.5 v9 04/19] xen: Relocate p2m_mem_access_resume to mem_access common
>>> On 24.09.14 at 11:09, <tklengyel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Relocate p2m_mem_access_resume to common and abstract the new > p2m_mem_event_emulate_check into the p2m layer to. > > Signed-off-by: Tamas K Lengyel <tklengyel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > v9: Pass the vcpu instead of the domain to emulate_check. Is it correct that you resent just patches 4 and 6 as v9? > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c > @@ -1382,6 +1382,60 @@ static void > p2m_mem_event_fill_regs(mem_event_request_t *req) > req->x86_regs.cs_arbytes = seg.attr.bytes; > } > > +void p2m_mem_event_emulate_check(struct vcpu *v, const mem_event_response_t > *rsp) > +{ > + /* Mark vcpu for skipping one instruction upon rescheduling. */ > + if ( rsp->flags & MEM_EVENT_FLAG_EMULATE ) > + { > + struct domain *d = v->domain; > + xenmem_access_t access; > + bool_t violation = 1; > + > + if ( p2m_get_mem_access(d, rsp->gfn, &access) == 0 ) While it's certainly not wrong, I personally dislike such single use local variables - you could easily (and without hampering readability) pass v->domain here. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |