On 19/10/18 15:28, Wei Liu wrote: > This is a bit more complicated than the HVM case because system > domains have PV guest type. Leave them like that. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com> > --- > v2: > 1. Remove useless ASSERTs. > 2. Rewrite comment. > --- > xen/common/domain.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/common/domain.c b/xen/common/domain.c > index 65151e2..fc09088 100644 > --- a/xen/common/domain.c > +++ b/xen/common/domain.c > @@ -322,17 +322,36 @@ struct domain *domain_create(domid_t domid, > } > > /* Sort out our idea of is_{pv,hvm}_domain(). */ > - if ( config && (config->flags & XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm_guest) ) > + if ( config ) > { > + if ( config->flags & XEN_DOMCTL_CDF_hvm_guest)
Space at the end. > + { > #ifdef CONFIG_HVM > - d->guest_type = guest_type_hvm; > + d->guest_type = guest_type_hvm; > +#else > + err = -EINVAL; > + goto fail; > +#endif > + } > + else > + { > +#ifdef CONFIG_PV > + d->guest_type = guest_type_pv; > #else > err = -EINVAL; > goto fail; Indentation to match the HVM case? Otherwise, Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel