On 3/11/2017 12:17 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.03.17 at 16:33, <yu.c.zh...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dm.c
@@ -288,6 +288,7 @@ static int inject_event(struct domain *d,
return 0;
}
+#define DMOP_op_mask 0xff
static int dm_op(domid_t domid,
Please follow the existing continuation model used here, instead of
re-introducing the hvmop one.
Thank you, Jan. Andrew has the same concern with you. So please see my reply
to his comments - I explained the difficulties I met while doing this.
It would be
great if you and Andrew could give some advice.:-)
--- a/xen/include/asm-x86/p2m.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/p2m.h
@@ -611,6 +611,11 @@ void p2m_change_type_range(struct domain *d,
int p2m_change_type_one(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn,
p2m_type_t ot, p2m_type_t nt);
+/* Synchronously change types across a range of p2m entries (start ... end) */
+void p2m_finish_type_change(struct domain *d,
+ unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
+ p2m_type_t ot, p2m_type_t nt);
The comment should not give the impression that this is an open
range. I.e. [start, end], but perhaps even better would be to not
use "end" here, as that frequently (e.g. p2m_change_type_range())
this is used to indicate an exclusive range end.
So how about [first_gfn, last_gfn]?
Thanks
Yu
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
