On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Tim Deegan <t...@xen.org> wrote: > Hi, > > At 17:38 +0000 on 07 Jul (1436290689), Sahita, Ravi wrote: >> In order to make forward progress, do the other maintainers (Jan, >> Andrew, Tim) agree with the patch direction that George has >> suggested for this particular patch? > > I'm no longer a maintainer for this code, but FWIW I think that this > direction (adding a new argument to the internal APIs rather than > adding new internal APIs) is correct. > > Because the sve bit must be _set_ to get the old/default behaviour, I > think the p2m_pt implementation should always return sve = 1 on _get > and possibly also assert sve != 0 on _set.
Yes, I was thinking about this after I sent the patch. If you re-send, Ravi, please modify the patch as Tim suggests. (Use your best judgement about asserting sve != 0.) -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
