Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 RESEND 05/17] x86/VPMU: Handle APIC_LVTPC accesses

[Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 04/26/2014 04:20 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Boris Ostrovsky [mailto:boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 8:50 PM
> >
> > Update APIC_LVTPC vector when HVM guest writes to it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, with one comment.
>
> > @@ -230,18 +238,18 @@ void vpmu_initialise(struct vcpu *v)
> >       case X86_VENDOR_AMD:
> >           if ( svm_vpmu_initialise(v, opt_vpmu_enabled) != 0 )
> >               opt_vpmu_enabled = 0;
> > -        break;
> > +        return;
> >
> >       case X86_VENDOR_INTEL:
> >           if ( vmx_vpmu_initialise(v, opt_vpmu_enabled) != 0 )
> >               opt_vpmu_enabled = 0;
> > -        break;
> > +        return;
> >
> >       default:
> >           printk("VPMU: Initialization failed. "
> >                  "Unknown CPU vendor %d\n", vendor);
> >           opt_vpmu_enabled = 0;
> > -        break;
> > +        return;
> >       }
> >   }
> not understand break->return change here
Hmm... I am sure there was a perfectly good reason why I did this ;-).

Perhaps at some point I had something at the end of the routine that I 
wasn't supposed to be executed if initialization failed. But it's not 
there now so I'll revert these changes (unless I find why I did this).
-boris

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