[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/8] xen/x86: Remove PVH support
On 10/18/2016 11:33 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 18/10/16 16:45, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 10/18/2016 09:46 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> On 14/10/16 20:05, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>>> We are replacing existing PVH guests with new implementation. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> >>> >>> with the following addressed: >>> >>>> diff --git a/include/xen/xen.h b/include/xen/xen.h >>>> index f0f0252..d0f9684 100644 >>>> --- a/include/xen/xen.h >>>> +++ b/include/xen/xen.h >>>> @@ -29,17 +29,6 @@ enum xen_domain_type { >>>> #define xen_initial_domain() (0) >>>> #endif /* CONFIG_XEN_DOM0 */ >>>> >>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_XEN_PVH >>>> -/* This functionality exists only for x86. The XEN_PVHVM support exists >>>> - * only in x86 world - hence on ARM it will be always disabled. >>>> - * N.B. ARM guests are neither PV nor HVM nor PVHVM. >>>> - * It's a bit like PVH but is different also (it's further towards the H >>>> - * end of the spectrum than even PVH). >>>> - */ >>>> -#include <xen/features.h> >>>> -#define xen_pvh_domain() (xen_pv_domain() && \ >>>> - xen_feature(XENFEAT_auto_translated_physmap)) >>>> -#else >>>> #define xen_pvh_domain() (0) >>> Any reason you don't remove this, too (together with its last user in >>> arch/x86/xen/grant-table.c) ? >> grant-table.c is in fact one of the reasons: we will be using that code >> for PVHv2 again so I kept it to avoid unnecessary code churn. >> >> Also, we want to have a nop definition of xen_pvh_domain() for >> !CONFIG_XEN_PVH. > Okay, could you mention this in the commit message, please? Will do. -boris _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |