[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 8/9] x86/shadow: call sh_detach_old_tables() directly
- To: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:37:30 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=+qval3siV5ZTKNWLhov1cDgk4NvpyHzDD1M+ttv7kF4=; b=gA7Gbjxf0pte2BFDicWtKQD9o6gAlgFet1bQWJhlvDTmICr2AXGaEQuBlr/168VGF7G/iasi8Wh6Nf5Od3Svty1YihnTW79xieCmAaZ9gQVaf7gAjKF1q3eV9l4y8Jva2JlMA9LB8O0dhcaWtvCIKWGxXOwudOqcXsZ+7S1jlhN7g6K18GXGhy5eb9ARXPKLnJEstXpH1DsuC3KZJVeRjq9z8IK8uQhFt7m0Gv+tFb7Snj5Z0CzHkwssF0rf+eS66hokUUaZVuG5gAbevUIPHPOorDth3G0ImtlN0iU3MzJyDxmL2hHxAv5CfY+CJYnyjwn+Z233vzf0R04O9iOX3A==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=JzR31wFCldoDt6e3WBOr51kRz2ZInlq8C/vsEUyEmkgxDSleoq5cVK+fh0qLFMMwPQg/xz+f9AbWJNXRnsgUz0btrZ92sh/dEVZSLtvKCbT8o1F2xDV/LLszwTBeqq//sAofccfmTqYjthtB4pNTpaYSo3E71bnAQZpykhN88xGZ103sgTwUDdG82mJaX805lNpLJaM0IM1Zoey/3CFX0SdOWBbeJzVmcqFKQ43+ASZPJDG9BDkyQszFQvkBRasVzmHTU8Y3wG1yjeAQCdRPTDqHzxGhDKnWMtlgeoaCsRyBbi36oC5Csk2U60RhRdEtt1h17iKbtbhICK/LwztDYQ==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 09:37:39 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 12.01.2023 00:56, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 11/01/2023 1:57 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/common.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/common.c
>> @@ -2264,6 +2264,29 @@ void shadow_prepare_page_type_change(str
>> shadow_remove_all_shadows(d, page_to_mfn(page));
>> }
>>
>> +/*
>> + * Removes v->arch.paging.shadow.shadow_table[].
>> + * Does all appropriate management/bookkeeping/refcounting/etc...
>> + */
>> +static void sh_detach_old_tables(struct vcpu *v)
>> +{
>> + struct domain *d = v->domain;
>> + unsigned int i;
>> +
>> + ////
>> + //// vcpu->arch.paging.shadow.shadow_table[]
>> + ////
>
> Honestly, I don't see what the point of this comment is at all. I'd
> suggest just dropping it as you move the function, which avoids the need
> to debate over C++ comments.
As said in the remark, this style of comments is used elsewhere as well,
to indicate what data structure a certain piece of code in a function is
updating. Earlier on the function here also played with
vcpu->arch.paging.shadow.guest_vtable, at which point having such comments
was certainly not entirely useless.
> Preferably with this done, Acked-by: Andrew Cooper
> <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks. I guess I'll drop it then; should the function become more
involved again, we could clearly resurrect comments in whatever shape is
then deemed best.
Jan
|
