Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 2/9] ioreq-server: pre-series tidy up

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 06 May 2014 13:26
> To: Paul Durrant
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Keir (Xen.org)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] ioreq-server: pre-series tidy up
> 
> >>> On 01.05.14 at 14:08, <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > This patch tidies up various parts of the code that following patches move
> > around. If these modifications were combined with the code motion it
> would
> > be easy to miss them.
> >
> > There's also some function renaming to reflect purpose and a single
> > whitespace fix.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> 

Thanks.

> with one comment:
> 
> > @@ -1425,14 +1425,15 @@ void hvm_vcpu_down(struct vcpu *v)
> >      }
> >  }
> >
> > -bool_t hvm_send_assist_req(struct vcpu *v)
> > +bool_t hvm_send_assist_req(void)
> >  {
> > -    ioreq_t *p;
> > +    struct vcpu *v = current;
> > +    ioreq_t *p = get_ioreq(v);
> 
> Would the patch grow significantly bigger if you renamed "v" to "curr"
> here, as we generally try to do to document that it's not an arbitrary
> vCPU that is being referred to (the ack stands regardless of whether
> you do the rename)?
> 

I'll take a look.

  Paul

> Jan


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