On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Razvan Cojocaru <rcojoc...@bitdefender.com> wrote:
> On 02/18/2016 09:35 PM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote: > > This patch adds ARM support for guest-request monitor vm-events. > > > > Summary of changes: > > == Moved to common-side: > > * XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_EVENT_GUEST_REQUEST handling (moved from X86 > > arch_monitor_domctl_event to common monitor_domctl) > > * hvm_event_guest_request, hvm_event_traps (also added target vcpu as > param) > > * guest-request bits from X86 'struct arch_domain' (to common 'struct > domain') > > == ARM implementations: > > * do_hvm_op now handling of HVMOP_guest_request_vm_event => calls > > hvm_event_guest_request (as on X86) > > * arch_monitor_get_capabilities: updated to reflect support for > > XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_EVENT_GUEST_REQUEST > > * vm_event_init_domain (does nothing), vm_event_cleanup_domain > > == Misc: > > * hvm_event_fill_regs renamed to arch_hvm_event_fill_regs, no longer > > X86-specific. ARM-side implementation of this function currently > does > > nothing, that will be added in a separate patch. > > We should probably take into account what happens with Tamas' "vm_event: > consolidate hvm_event_fill_regs and p2m_vm_event_fill_regs" patch here. > That patch already affects hvm_event_fill_regs(). > Well it seems one of us will have to rebase depending which patch gets accepted & merged first. The conflict is minimal so it's not a major issue. If my patch gets merged first then just have to introduce the empty function in the ARM header with the new name. Tamas
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
