Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 16/19] xen/arm: Introduce a macro to synchronize SError

[Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@xxxxxxx>]

On 2017/4/5 15:29, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 05/04/2017 08:14, Wei Chen wrote:
> > > Because the ASSERT I suggested was wrong, sorry for that. It should have
> > > been:
> > >
> > > ASSERT(!cpus_have_cap(feat) && local_abort_is_enabled());
> > >
> > > This is because we want abort enabled when the "feature" is not present.
> > >
> > > This series looks good so far, so I would be happy if you send a
> > > follow-up patch to add the ASSERT rather than modifying this patch.
> > I will send a follow-up patch after this series has been done.
> Well, you have to resend this series. So why don't you add the ASSERT in
> the new version?
I am happy to do that. I misunderstood this comment "rather than 
modifying this patch".
I will add a patch in this series for ASSERT.

> Cheers,

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