[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v10] x86/emulate: Send vm_event from emulate
- To: Alexandru Stefan ISAILA <aisaila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 17:04:51 +0200
- Cc: Petre Ovidiu PIRCALABU <ppircalabu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "wl@xxxxxxx" <wl@xxxxxxx>, Razvan COJOCARU <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx" <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, "paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx" <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx" <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 15:04:53 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 17.09.2019 17:00, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> There is no problem, I understand the risk of having suspicious return
> values. I am not hanged on having this return. I used this to skip
> adding a new return value. I can do this if we agree on a suitable name
> for a new return value in enum hvm_translation_result. I can propose
> HVMTRANS_bad_gfn_access.
How intrusive would such a change be?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
