Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 11/13] x86/altp2m: define and implement alternate p2m HVMOP types.

["Sahita, Ravi" <ravi.sahita@xxxxxxxxx>]

>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 12:34 AM
>
>>>> On 06.07.15 at 12:09, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 01/07/15 19:09, Ed White wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Ed White <edmund.h.white@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> I am still very much unconvinced by the argument against having a
>> single HVMOP_altp2m and a set of subops.  do_domctl() and do_sysctl()
>> are examples of a subop style hypercall with different XSM settings
>> for different subops.
>
>+1


Thanks Andrew and Jan for providing feedback on what the maintainers want to 
see for the HVMOP_altp2m.

Just wanted some clarity from a timing perspective on this one so we know how 
to proceed - is creating a single HVMOP_altp2m and a set of associated subops a 
requirement to be completed for 4.6 or is that something that can be addressed 
in a subsequent change?

Thanks,
Ravi

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