Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86/shadow: correct shadow_vcpu_init()'s comment

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 24.04.2024 12:06, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 04:33:09PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> As of the commit referenced below the update_paging_modes() hook is per-
>> domain and hence also set (already) during domain construction.
>>
>> Fixes: d0816a9085b5 ("x86/paging: move update_paging_modes() hook")
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/common.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/common.c
>> @@ -99,11 +99,12 @@ int shadow_domain_init(struct domain *d)
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> -/* Setup the shadow-specfic parts of a vcpu struct. Note: The most important
>> - * job is to initialize the update_paging_modes() function pointer, which is
>> - * used to initialized the rest of resources. Therefore, it really does not
>> - * matter to have v->arch.paging.mode pointing to any mode, as long as it 
>> can
>> - * be compiled.
>> +/*
>> + * Setup the shadow-specific parts of a vcpu struct. Note: The
>> + * update_paging_modes() function pointer, which is used to initialize other
>> + * resources, was already set during domain creation. Therefore it really 
>> does
>> + * not matter to have v->arch.paging.mode pointing to any (legitimate) mode,
>> + * as long as it can be compiled.
> 
> Do you need to keep the last sentence?  If update_paging_modes is
> already set at domain create, the 'Therefore it really does...'
> doesn't seem to make much sense anymore, as it's no longer
> shadow_vcpu_init() that sets it.

I thought about dropping, but the "any mode does" seemed to me to be still
relevant to mention. I thought about re-wording, too, without coming to any
good alternative. Hence, despite agreeing with you that 'Therefore ...' does
not quite fit (anymore), I left that as is.

> Possibly with that dropped:
> 
> Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks.

Jan