Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/6] prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/06/15 11:15, Jan Beulich wrote:
> ... when the domain pointer is already available or such operations occur
> frequently in a function. There's no particular ordering requirement
> between the individual patches, they only all do the same thing to
> different areas of code.
>
> 1: domctl: prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()
> 2: x86: prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()
> 3: x86/HVM: prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()
> 4: x86/mm: prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()
> 5: x86/context-switch: prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()
> 6: x86/HAP: prefer is_..._domain() over is_..._vcpu()
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>

The entire series, Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>

With two further suggestions:

Patch 2:

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
> @@ -798,7 +798,7 @@ int cpuid_hypervisor_leaves( uint32_t id
>              *ebx = 0x40000200;
>          *ecx = 0;          /* Features 1 */
>          *edx = 0;          /* Features 2 */
> -        if ( is_pv_vcpu(current) )
> +        if ( is_pv_domain(d) )
>              *ecx |= XEN_CPUID_FEAT1_MMU_PT_UPDATE_PRESERVE_AD;
>          break;

It would be clearer to s/d/currd/ in this functions.  It won't make the
patch much larger.


Patch 5:

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> @@ -1429,9 +1429,9 @@ static void _update_runstate_area(struct
>          v->arch.pv_vcpu.need_update_runstate_area = 1;
>  }
>  
> -static inline int need_full_gdt(struct vcpu *v)
> +static inline int need_full_gdt(const struct domain *d)

As you area already changing this, you might as well switch int for bool_t.

~Andrew

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