Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 08/34] x86: enclose hvm_op and dm_op in CONFIG_HVM in PV hypercall table

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 17.08.18 at 17:12, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/pv/hypercall.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pv/hypercall.c
> @@ -68,7 +68,9 @@ const hypercall_table_t pv_hypercall_table[] = {
>  #endif
>      HYPERCALL(event_channel_op),
>      COMPAT_CALL(physdev_op),
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HVM
>      HYPERCALL(hvm_op),
> +#endif
>      HYPERCALL(sysctl),
>      HYPERCALL(domctl),
>  #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC
> @@ -78,7 +80,9 @@ const hypercall_table_t pv_hypercall_table[] = {
>      HYPERCALL(tmem_op),
>  #endif
>      HYPERCALL(xenpmu_op),
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HVM
>      COMPAT_CALL(dm_op),
> +#endif
>      HYPERCALL(mca),
>      HYPERCALL(arch_1),
>  };

Is there anything speaking against putting them both into the same
single #ifdef? Also, what about hypercall_args_table[]?

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel