>>> On 24.06.15 at 20:08, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 24/06/15 18:57, Ed White wrote: >> On 06/24/2015 07:59 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 22.06.15 at 20:56, <edmund.h.wh...@intel.com> wrote: >>>> + case HVM_PARAM_ALTP2MHVM: >>>> + if ( a.value > 1 ) >>>> + rc = -EINVAL; >>>> + if ( a.value && >>>> + d->arch.hvm_domain.params[HVM_PARAM_NESTEDHVM] ) >>>> + rc = -EINVAL; >>>> + break; >>> As you added the new param to the change-once section of >>> hvm_allow_set_param() - what is this code good for? >> I don't understand. How does change-once invalidate this code? > > I don't believe it does. This code (appears to) enforce the param being > a boolean, and exclusive against HVM_PARAM_NESTEDHVM.
Ah, indeed - I didn't pay attention to it being a different param in the second if(). I.e. scratch the reply I just sent to Ed's mail. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
