[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] domctl: introduce a new domain create flag, XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_disable_fifo, ...
On 25.11.2020 10:20, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 24.11.2020 20:17, Paul Durrant wrote: >> --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h >> +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h >> @@ -70,9 +70,11 @@ struct xen_domctl_createdomain { >> #define XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_iommu (1U<<_XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_iommu) >> #define _XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_nested_virt 6 >> #define XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_nested_virt (1U << _XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_nested_virt) >> +#define _XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_disable_fifo 7 >> +#define XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_disable_fifo (1U << _XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_disable_fifo) > > Despite getting longish, I think this needs "evtchn" somewhere in > the name. To keep size bounded, maybe XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_no_fifo_evtchn? > >> /* Max XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_* constant. Used for ABI checking. */ >> -#define XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_MAX XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_nested_virt >> +#define XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_MAX XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_disable_fifo > > While not directly related to this patch, I'm puzzled by the > presence of this constant: I've not been able to find any use of > it. In particular you did have a need to modify > sanitise_domain_config(). So it was you to introduce this, right away without any user, in 7fb0e134f8c6 ("tools/ocaml: abi: Use formal conversion and check in more places"). The only reference is from what I regard as a comment (I don't speak any ocaml, so I may be wrong). Could you clarify why we need to maintain this constant? Thanks, Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |