Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] x86: split PV dom0 builder to pv/dom0_builder.c

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:12:08PM +0000, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:54:56PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote:
> [...]
> > +    /*
> > +     * PVH Fixme: XENFEAT_supervisor_mode_kernel has been reused in PVH 
> > with a
> > +     * different meaning.
> 
> Crap, I've forgot to remove this PVH fixme!

Don't worry, I will take care of it.

> 
> [...]
> > diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/dom0_build.h 
> > b/xen/include/asm-x86/dom0_build.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..2ba349e445
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/dom0_build.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
> > +#ifndef _DOM0_BUILD_H_
> > +#define _DOM0_BUILD_H_
> > +
> > +#include <asm/setup.h>
> > +
> > +extern unsigned int dom0_memflags;
> > +extern cpumask_t dom0_cpus;
> > +
> > +unsigned long dom0_compute_nr_pages(
> > +    struct domain *d, struct elf_dom_parms *parms, unsigned long 
> > initrd_len);
> > +struct vcpu *dom0_setup_vcpu(struct domain *d, unsigned int vcpu_id,
> > +                                    unsigned int cpu);
> > +int dom0_setup_permissions(struct domain *d);
> > +
> > +int dom0_construct_pv(
> > +    struct domain *d,
> > +    const module_t *image, unsigned long image_headroom,
> > +    module_t *initrd,
> > +    void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t *),
> > +    char *cmdline);
> 
> Since this is kind of new code, could you fix the indentation of the
> prototypes?

Sure. I also notice there is something wrong with the indentation of
dom0_setup_vcpu. I will fix them.

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