Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/hvm: Fix HVM guest regression introduced by c58ba78c84

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich
> Sent: 04 February 2015 12:46
> To: Andrew Cooper
> Cc: Xen-devel
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/hvm: Fix HVM guest regression
> introduced by c58ba78c84
> 
> >>> On 04.02.15 at 13:35, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> > @@ -638,7 +638,7 @@ static int hvm_ioreq_server_add_vcpu(struct
> hvm_ioreq_server *s,
> >      {
> >          struct domain *d = s->domain;
> >
> > -        rc = alloc_unbound_xen_event_channel(v->domain, 0, s->domid,
> NULL);
> > +        rc = alloc_unbound_xen_event_channel(v->domain, v->vcpu_id, s-
> >domid, NULL);
> 
> But this sits in a conditional checking v->vcpu_id == 0. I.e. I don't
> see what difference this makes.

True, but without the context it did appear to be wrong. Perhaps best to go 
with vcpu_id for clarity?

  Paul

> 
> Jan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel