Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v14 03/17] pvh prep: code motion

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 04.11.13 at 13:14, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -522,27 +522,27 @@ int hvm_domain_initialise(struct domain *d)
>      spin_lock_init(&d->arch.hvm_domain.irq_lock);
>      spin_lock_init(&d->arch.hvm_domain.uc_lock);
>  
> -    INIT_LIST_HEAD(&d->arch.hvm_domain.msixtbl_list);
> -    spin_lock_init(&d->arch.hvm_domain.msixtbl_list_lock);

While I can see the need for moving stuff so that it gets done
earlier - why do these two lines need to be moved _down_?
Even if PVH wasn't using the MSI-X support code HVM needs,
I can't see them doing any harm.

Jan


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