>>> On 04.01.17 at 13:39, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c > @@ -914,56 +914,35 @@ static int hvm_save_cpu_ctxt(struct domain *d, > hvm_domain_context_t *h) > } > > /* Return a string indicating the error, or NULL for valid. */ > -const char *hvm_efer_valid(const struct vcpu *v, uint64_t value, > - signed int cr0_pg) > +const char *hvm_efer_valid(const struct vcpu *v, uint64_t value, int cr0_pg)
Please can we keep the "signed" here, to make clear signedness indeed matters (as opposed to various other uses of plain int we still have which could equally well be unsigned int)? Other than that Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> albeit I have one more question: > if ( (value & EFER_LMSLE) && !cpu_has_lmsl ) > return "LMSLE without support"; Do you have any plans to include such non-CPUID-based features into the policy? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
