On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 08:48:05PM +0300, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> On 08/12/2015 08:45 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 12/08/15 18:00, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> >> hvm_event_crX() already returns a bool_t to tell us whether an
> >> event will be sent out or not, so the extra check that value != old
On 08/12/2015 08:45 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 12/08/15 18:00, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>> hvm_event_crX() already returns a bool_t to tell us whether an
>> event will be sent out or not, so the extra check that value != old
>> is not only useless, but also prevents non-onchangeonly events from
>>
On 12/08/15 18:00, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> hvm_event_crX() already returns a bool_t to tell us whether an
> event will be sent out or not, so the extra check that value != old
> is not only useless, but also prevents non-onchangeonly events from
> being sent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru
R
hvm_event_crX() already returns a bool_t to tell us whether an
event will be sent out or not, so the extra check that value != old
is not only useless, but also prevents non-onchangeonly events from
being sent.
Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru
---
xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c |9 +++--
1 file ch
