On Wed, 2015-10-14 at 17:29 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Obviously the call to xen_be_unbind_evtchn is not useful as is, but I do > > wonder where the evtchn which the primary console must have somewhere > > actually is then... > > Actually I think that xen_be_unbind_evtchn might be useful too, I think > that is the primary console evtchn. I wonder what specific bug I was > trying to fix when I introduced that if (!xendev->dev) check.
I misread xen_be_unbind_evtchn(&con->xendev) as taking xendev->dev instead, which would be NULL and hence pointless... But given that it isn't then yes it seems like it would be worth calling. Is it not the case that &con->xendev == xendev here, leading to another potential cleanup? Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
