[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

>>> 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.


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.