[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] hvm/dmop: Box dmop_args rather than passing multiple parameters around
> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Cooper [mailto:amc96@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Andrew Cooper > Sent: 21 April 2017 09:04 > To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jennifer Herbert > <jennifer.herbert@xxxxxxxxxx>; Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>; Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] hvm/dmop: Box dmop_args rather than passing > multiple parameters around > > On 21/04/2017 08:54, Paul Durrant wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: jennifer.herbert@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jennifer.herbert@xxxxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: 20 April 2017 19:00 > >> To: Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Jennifer Herbert <jennifer.herbert@xxxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Cooper > >> <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>; > >> Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>; Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> > >> Subject: [PATCH 1/4] hvm/dmop: Box dmop_args rather than passing > >> multiple parameters around > >> > >> From: Jennifer Herbert <Jennifer.Herbert@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> No functional change. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jennifer Herbert <Jennifer.Herbert@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> -- > >> CC: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> CC: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> > >> CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > ---- > >> ------- > >> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c > >> index d72b7bd..fb4bcec 100644 > >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c > >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c > >> @@ -25,6 +25,13 @@ > >> > >> #include <xsm/xsm.h> > >> > >> +struct dmop_args { > >> + domid_t domid; > >> + unsigned int nr_bufs; > >> + /* Reserve enough buf elements for all current hypercalls. */ > >> + struct xen_dm_op_buf buf[2]; > >> +}; > >> + > >> static bool copy_buf_from_guest(const xen_dm_op_buf_t bufs[], > >> unsigned int nr_bufs, void *dst, > >> unsigned int idx, size_t dst_size) > >> @@ -287,16 +294,14 @@ static int inject_event(struct domain *d, > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> -static int dm_op(domid_t domid, > >> - unsigned int nr_bufs, > >> - xen_dm_op_buf_t bufs[]) > >> +static int dm_op(struct dmop_args *op_args) > > Shouldn't this be a const pointer? > > No. copy_to_guest_buf() uses a non const reference of op_args- > >buf[$IDX]. > Can't that be const too (as I commented in the relevant patch)? Paul > ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |