On 02/26/2016 02:05 PM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote: > On 2/26/2016 1:56 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 26.02.16 at 12:07, <cz...@bitdefender.com> wrote: >>> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/altp2m.h >>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/altp2m.h >>> @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ >>> * this program; If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. >>> */ >>> -#ifndef _X86_ALTP2M_H >>> -#define _X86_ALTP2M_H >>> +#ifndef __ASM_X86_ALTP2M_H >>> +#define __ASM_X86_ALTP2M_H >> Unrelated change? (No need to undo, but please don't mix such >> into patches especially when they are quite large already anyway.) > > Noted. > >>> @@ -33,5 +33,9 @@ void altp2m_vcpu_initialise(struct vcpu *v); >>> void altp2m_vcpu_destroy(struct vcpu *v); >>> void altp2m_vcpu_reset(struct vcpu *v); >>> -#endif /* _X86_ALTP2M_H */ >>> +static inline uint16_t altp2m_vcpu_idx(struct vcpu *v) >> const > > 'const', as in: > > +static inline const uint16_t altp2m_vcpu_idx(struct vcpu *v)
Since there's no functional difference between returning const uint6_t and plain uint16_t, I assume that Jan meant "const struct vcpu *v". Cheers, Razvan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
