Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/pv: Short-circuit is_pv_{32,64}bit_domain() in !CONFIG_PV32 builds

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 29.04.2020 15:13, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 20/04/2020 15:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 17.04.2020 17:50, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/pv/domain.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pv/domain.c
>>> @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ int switch_compat(struct domain *d)
>>>          return 0;
>>>  
>>>      d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo = 1;
>>> -    d->arch.is_32bit_pv = 1;
>>> +    d->arch.pv.is_32bit = 1;
>>>  
>>>      for_each_vcpu( d, v )
>>>      {
>>> @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ int switch_compat(struct domain *d)
>>>      return 0;
>>>  
>>>   undo_and_fail:
>>> -    d->arch.is_32bit_pv = d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo = 0;
>>> +    d->arch.pv.is_32bit = d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo = 0;
>>>      for_each_vcpu( d, v )
>>>      {
>>>          free_compat_arg_xlat(v);
>>> @@ -358,7 +358,7 @@ int pv_domain_initialise(struct domain *d)
>>>      d->arch.ctxt_switch = &pv_csw;
>>>  
>>>      /* 64-bit PV guest by default. */
>>> -    d->arch.is_32bit_pv = d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo = 0;
>>> +    d->arch.pv.is_32bit = d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo = 0;
>> Switch to true/false while you're touching these?
> 
> Yes, but I'm tempted to delete these lines in the final hunk.  Its
> writing zeros into a zeroed structures.

Oh, yes, agreed.

Jan