Re: [Xen-devel] [V10 PATCH 18/23] PVH xen: add hypercall support for PVH

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 08.08.13 at 04:12, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 17:43:54 +0100
> George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>> wrote:
>> > +static hvm_hypercall_t *const pvh_hypercall64_table[NR_hypercalls]
>> > = {
>> > +    HYPERCALL(platform_op),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(memory_op),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(xen_version),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(console_io),
>> > +    [ __HYPERVISOR_grant_table_op ]  = (hvm_hypercall_t 
>> > *)hvm_grant_table_op,
>> > +    [ __HYPERVISOR_vcpu_op ]         = (hvm_hypercall_t *)hvm_vcpu_op,
>> > +    HYPERCALL(mmuext_op),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(xsm_op),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(sched_op),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(event_channel_op),
>> > +    [ __HYPERVISOR_physdev_op ]      = (hvm_hypercall_t *)hvm_physdev_op,
>> > +    HYPERCALL(hvm_op),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(sysctl),
>> > +    HYPERCALL(domctl)
>> > +};
>> 
>> It would be nice if this list were in the same order as the other
>> lists, so that it is easy to figure out what calls are common and what
>> calls are different.
> 
> These are ordered by the hcall number, and assists in the debug.

But with George asking, do you now understand a little better
why on a very early revision I had asked to copy either the
HVM or PV hypercall table, and override just the entries that
need overrides (making it very clear which ones differ)?

Jan


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