[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 04/13] pvh/acpi: Install handlers for ACPI-related PVH IO accesses
On 12/20/2016 06:24 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 17.12.16 at 00:18, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h >> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h >> @@ -527,7 +527,37 @@ DECLARE_HVM_SAVE_TYPE(HPET, 12, struct hvm_hw_hpet); >> /* >> * PM timer >> */ >> +#if __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__ >= 0x00040800 >> +struct hvm_hw_pmtimer { >> + uint32_t tmr_val; /* PM_TMR_BLK.TMR_VAL: 32bit free-running counter */ >> + uint16_t pm1a_sts; /* PM1a_EVT_BLK.PM1a_STS: status register */ >> + uint16_t pm1a_en; /* PM1a_EVT_BLK.PM1a_EN: enable register */ >> +#if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__) >> + uint16_t gpe0_sts; >> + uint16_t gpe0_en; >> +#endif > Why inside another #ifdef? There's no other example in this file > which might have suggested to you that it needs doing this way. > In fact there are also no pre-existing uses of > __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__ in this header, so I also don't see > why you added one (and then with a slightly off value check). Don't we want users of old interface to continue using original definition of hvm_hw_timer? And not to expose them to the fix routine below? -boris > > If anything the _whole_ header would need to become Xen/tools > only. > >> +static inline int _hvm_hw_fix_pmtimer(void *h, uint32_t size) >> +{ >> +#if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__) >> + struct hvm_hw_pmtimer *acpi = (struct hvm_hw_pmtimer *)h; >> + >> + if ( size == sizeof(struct hvm_hw_pmtimer_compat) ) >> + acpi->gpe0_sts = acpi->gpe0_en = 0; >> +#endif > Same here. > > Jan > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |