On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 2:18 AM Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: > > >>> On 03.05.19 at 00:13, <ta...@tklengyel.com> wrote: > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm.c > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm.c > > @@ -368,7 +368,9 @@ void __init arch_init_memory(void) > > > > efi_init_memory(); > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MEM_SHARING > > mem_sharing_init(); > > +#endif > > While for domctl code and alike using #ifdef may indeed be the > better choice, I think here an inline stub to avoid the #ifdef > would be preferable. Then again - recall you've already ack-ed > my patch to drop the function altogether? Perhaps you should > base your patch on mine (or Andrew could pull that other patch > into x86-next)? In that case (with the hunk above simply > dropped) > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
Yes, that hunk can be simply dropped if your patch makes it in before this does. That would be the optimal route. Thanks, Tamas _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
