Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 for-next v2 8/8] x86/mm: split HVM grant table code to hvm/mm.c

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 21.04.17 at 12:52, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 04:45:35AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 21.04.17 at 12:41, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:35:50AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 03.04.17 at 13:22, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> > PG_external requires hardware support so the code guarded by that is HVM
>> >> > only.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > ---
>> >> >  xen/arch/x86/hvm/Makefile         |  1 +
>> >> >  xen/arch/x86/hvm/mm.c             | 85 
>> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >> 
>> >> I think the moved code would better go under x86/mm/, possibly (but
>> >> not necessarily) into p2m.c.
>> > 
>> > I disagree here. What good is there to keep this code when hvm support
>> > is compiled out?
>> 
>> Hmm, do you mean to move e.g. mm/p2m-*.c and mm/hap/ to
>> hvm/mm/ then too? I think we shouldn't go overboard with this
>> shuffling.
>> 
> 
> Maybe, I haven't quite made up my mind.
> 
> I take it you will be against splitting / moving p2m code?

I think so, yes. The huge files you're breaking apart were ripe
for that even without the intention of separating PV from HVM.
The p2m code, otoh, had been split into pieces already quite
some time ago.

Btw, looking at the subject again - moving the code into
hvm/grant_table.c would be fine with me.

Jan


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