>>> On 24.11.16 at 18:02, <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 18.11.16 at 18:13, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> + {
>> + struct xen_dm_op_get_ioreq_server_info *data =
>> + &op.u.get_ioreq_server_info;
>> +
>> + rc = hvm_get_ioreq_server_info(d, data->id,
>> + &data->ioreq_pfn,
>> + &data->bufioreq_pfn,
>> + &data->bufioreq_port);
>
> Before the call you should check the __pad field to be zero
> (presumably also elsewhere).
And please no double underscores at the beginning of those field
names; preferably none at all (as field names may collide with file
scope object-like macros).
>> struct xen_dm_op {
>> uint32_t op;
>> + union {
>
> Even if no current structure needs it, I think we should have a 32-bit
> padding field ahead of the union right away, to cover (current or
> future) uint64_aligned_t uses inside the union members.
Actually I did overlook that the few instances of uint64_aligned_t
are in direct union members, not in fields referenced, so this isn't just
a "should" really.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
