[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/HVM: alter completion-needed checking
>>> On 09.04.18 at 15:33, <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx] >> Sent: 09 April 2018 14:24 >> To: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paul Durrant >> <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>; Kevin >> Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>; Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> >> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] x86/HVM: alter completion-needed checking >> >> The function only looks at the ioreq_t, so pass it a pointer to just >> that. Also use it in hvmemul_do_io(). >> >> Suggested-by: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> >> --- >> RFC: While this avoids some open coding, generated code looks to be >> worse for that particular case. I'm therefore not certain that we >> want this change (or perhaps just the function name/signature >> change portion). >> > > FAOD my reason for suggesting it was such that exactly the same test > implementation is used in all cases to decide whether I/O completion is > needed. So does that mean you think the change is worthwhile? If so, do you have any comments, or are you willing to ack it (despite it not really being a 4.11 candidate at this point in time)? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |