[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2] x86/vlapic: call vmx_vlapic_msr_changed through an hvm_function callback
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:58:03 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=FSqCTzbQHgjNRQrU+5f4nfSA1DCHLoFe1pgl2iU8HYU=; b=aIbyDBuIhYlcJ9HKSb5m1onvPOtBvxAMUzkYamAPH8P3jAJ3sSQFFfe2FTpLx61iOfzNDwwXLhUicwL4B1wLp8EOrRKkQyEZEeIhE+23twl8Ws6ewBp9QrXg76rRiz3eIky2/HjmGVhLJLh2MDVkR7zeAAU43dTxuTAUdt0geK+qc/f5cpJM9LaJ/j6kctMTz98pkHHys2yOlX3S4I+j8+IssPEF+3E9WpRtXgBzy2NLvNBMB3GnTnYSWnR7tgr7gKk7FoP8iMhII5BXMvHdFKN+Rtd/YGAXyNkLpjwz9SZko/zKHvCI2Us3YVMqSaMm7KC/QwoXUMCMLjbsxV5CqA==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=hAN7OBJRROoaP5W95NIm7Yn+vmbamXW8GIrWQJLOlsUw7A5EKGidaK0spI/XlhFfLF4Zdef5S/gADJAQhBXCK3WbjHNBHOlvAYMEfNlWsl9ck4EouXGqyR+hNzjeGSiqPInr9Mk28FKt/omUc1wbiiTnkjlIY1SPrNhU+/zYG9/81+pH2yJqU79+UnNMHF+NHTzzIeWFV3SPmz8rYzsC3nV/VfitwtUs82qPe9V47o8VtH28zxMTUO46srVANSc+hazTLoeG89+7V9NoZeV7BkF8mlDGDe7OFV+ZfijOPkae0zcoJbTCxpH+qWZo8Oq9eG6/bxiwIZKhHKFD4HanuA==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalodowa@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:58:17 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 13.02.2023 12:05, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 13/02/2023 10:54 am, Xenia Ragiadakou wrote:
>>
>> On 2/13/23 12:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> I keep forgetting why putting it on just the declaration isn't
>>> sufficient; I
>>> guess a short comment to that effect next to cf_check's definition in
>>> compiler.h would help).
>>
>> Yes, that would help. I don't know why it is not sufficient placing it
>> just in the declaration.
>
> Because it's part of the function's type.
What does that mean? Is that any different from e.g. noreturn, which
also is part of the function's type, and the compiler records this when
seeing the declaration. It only ever accumulates (never removes) such
attributes when seeing a 2nd declaration (unless multiple declarations
are otherwise rejected) or, finally, the definition.
Jan
|
