On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 04:45:57AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 27.09.16 at 17:57, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: > > It doesn't make sense since the idle domain doesn't receive any events. > > The change itself is fine, but I think it would help if the commit > message made explicit why this is becoming relevant.
Done. I've added: "This is relevant in order to be sure that hypercall_preempt_check is not called by the idle domain." To the commit message. Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
