On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 18:32 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 25/03/15 14:22, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > +static int vtimer_cntp_cval(struct cpu_user_regs *regs, uint64_t *r, int
> > read)
> > +{
> > + struct vcpu *v = current;
> > +
> > + if ( psr_mode_is_user(regs) &&
> > + !(READ_SYSREG(CNTKCTL_EL1) & CNTKCTL_EL1_EL0PTEN) )
>
> Sorry, I didn't notice it on my previous review.
>
> CNTKCTL_EL1_EL0PTEN and psr_mode_is_user are only defined in
> respectively patch #6 and #4.
Well spotted.
> Can you invert the patches to avoid build breakage during bisection?
I was hoping to be able to backport this, so I think I will move the
definitions of CNTKCTL_* here and either decide to backport the psr_mdoe
refactoring or see if I can avoid using it in this patch.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
