On 30/08/2024 10:46 pm, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> Transition the incoming boot loader name to be held in struct boot_info.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <[email protected]>
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootinfo.h |  2 ++
>  xen/arch/x86/setup.c                | 15 ++++++++-------
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootinfo.h 
> b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootinfo.h
> index e850f80d26a7..e69feb1bb8be 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootinfo.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bootinfo.h
> @@ -10,6 +10,8 @@
>  
>  struct boot_info {
>      unsigned int nr_mods;
> +
> +    const char *boot_loader_name;

Simply loader, matching the __setup_xen() variable you dropped, will be
fine.

> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
> index dd94ee2e736b..432b7d1701e4 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
> @@ -2054,7 +2055,7 @@ void asmlinkage __init noreturn __start_xen(unsigned 
> long mbi_p)
>       */
>      dom0 = create_dom0(mod, modules_headroom,
>                         initrdidx < boot_info->nr_mods ? mod + initrdidx : 
> NULL,
> -                       kextra, loader);
> +                       kextra, boot_info->boot_loader_name);

Do I want to know why create_dom0() cares about our bootloader?  I'm
sure the answer is no.

~Andrew

Reply via email to