[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/nHVM: generic hook adjustments
- To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 12:15:23 -0400
- Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>, suravee.suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, chegger@xxxxxxxxx, Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@xxxxxxxxx>, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@xxxxxxx>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 16:15:45 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 06/26/2015 11:56 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.06.15 at 17:50, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/26/2015 11:42 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 26.06.15 at 16:58, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/26/2015 05:02 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
-uint64_t nsvm_vcpu_guestcr3(struct vcpu *v)
-{
- return vcpu_nestedsvm(v).ns_vmcb_guestcr3;
-}
-
If this is removed then I don't see why we still need ns_vmcb_guestcr3,
I don't see it being used anywhere except for being assigned a value.
I think in this patch I shouldn't remove any structure fields.
Perhaps a follow-up patch by one of the SVM maintainers?
OK.
Is this a shorthand for an ack then?
I was actually responding to your follow-up patch request.
But for SVM bits
Acked-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
