[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 11/15] x86/hvm: Reimplement hvm_copy_*_nofault() in terms of no pagefault_info

To: Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 16:38:20 +0000
Cc: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 16:39:47 +0000
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>

On 23/11/16 16:35, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 15:38 +0000 on 23 Nov (1479915534), Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> No functional change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Shouldn't this also update the comments to describe the new semantics
> of hvm_copy_*()?

I couldn't find an easy way of phrasing it which didn't get deleted by
the subsequent patch.

~Andrew

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

References:
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.9 00/15] XSA-191 followup
  - From: Andrew Cooper
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH 11/15] x86/hvm: Reimplement hvm_copy_*_nofault() in terms of no pagefault_info
  - From: Andrew Cooper
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 11/15] x86/hvm: Reimplement hvm_copy_*_nofault() in terms of no pagefault_info
  - From: Tim Deegan

Prev by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/15] x86/hvm: Rename hvm_emulate_init() and hvm_emulate_prepare() for clarity
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 06/15] x86/emul: Rework emulator event injection
Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 11/15] x86/hvm: Reimplement hvm_copy_*_nofault() in terms of no pagefault_info
Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 11/15] x86/hvm: Reimplement hvm_copy_*_nofault() in terms of no pagefault_info
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.