Juergen Gross writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 02/13] libxc: split xc_logdirty_control()
from xc_shadow_control()"):
> On 05.07.21 17:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> +long long xc_logdirty_control(xc_interface *xch,
> >>> + uint32_t domid,
> >>> + unsigned int sop,
> >>> + xc_hypercall_buffer_t *dirty_bitmap,
> >>> + unsigned long pages,
> >>> + unsigned int mode,
> >>> + xc_shadow_op_stats_t *stats)
> >>> +{
> >>> + int rc;
> >>> + struct xen_domctl domctl = {
> >>> + .cmd = XEN_DOMCTL_shadow_op,
> >>> + .domain = domid,
> >>> + .u.shadow_op = {
> >>> + .op = sop,
> >>
> >> And same here the other way round: sop should really only be one of
> >> XEN_DOMCTL_SHADOW_OP_CLEAN or XEN_DOMCTL_SHADOW_OP_PEEK.
> >>
> >> With that fixed you can add my:
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com>
> >
> > Thanks, but I won't take this just yet, awaiting your (and maybe
> > others') view(s) on my reply above.
>
> I'm not feeling really strong in this regard. Either way is fine for
> me.
OK. My understanding then is that you are happy with Jan's patch and
he can add the Reviewed-by even though he's not checking the ops.
Is that right ?
If so, then Jan, please add my
Acked-by: Ian Jackson <i...@xenproject.org>
along with Juergen's review.
If I have misunderstood please explain :-).
Thanks,
Ian.
