> From: Andrew Cooper [mailto:andrew.coop...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 9:04 PM
>
> Sending an invalidation to the device model is an internal detail of
> completing the hypercall; callers should not need to be responsible for it.
> Drop HVM_HCALL_invalidate entirely and call se
>>> On 13.02.17 at 18:01, wrote:
> On 13/02/17 16:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.02.17 at 14:03, wrote:
>>> Sending an invalidation to the device model is an internal detail of
>>> completing the hypercall; callers should not need to be responsible for it.
>>> Drop HVM_HCALL_invalidate entire
On 13/02/17 16:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.02.17 at 14:03, wrote:
>> Sending an invalidation to the device model is an internal detail of
>> completing the hypercall; callers should not need to be responsible for it.
>> Drop HVM_HCALL_invalidate entirely and call send_invalidate_req() when
>
>>> On 13.02.17 at 14:03, wrote:
> Sending an invalidation to the device model is an internal detail of
> completing the hypercall; callers should not need to be responsible for it.
> Drop HVM_HCALL_invalidate entirely and call send_invalidate_req() when
> appropriate.
>
> This makes the function
On 02/13/2017 08:03 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
Sending an invalidation to the device model is an internal detail of
completing the hypercall; callers should not need to be responsible for it.
Drop HVM_HCALL_invalidate entirely and call send_invalidate_req() when
appropriate.
This makes the funct
Sending an invalidation to the device model is an internal detail of
completing the hypercall; callers should not need to be responsible for it.
Drop HVM_HCALL_invalidate entirely and call send_invalidate_req() when
appropriate.
This makes the function boolean in nature, although the existing
HVM_
