On 21/11/2019 18:50, Wei Liu wrote: > Also replace xen_guest with running_on_hypervisor boolean.
I agree with dropping xen_guest, but... > > Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <li...@microsoft.com> > --- > Changes in v4: > 1. Access ->name directly. > 2. Drop Roger's review tag. > --- > xen/arch/x86/setup.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c > index 19606d909b..123436b35a 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c > @@ -689,6 +689,7 @@ void __init noreturn __start_xen(unsigned long mbi_p) > int i, j, e820_warn = 0, bytes = 0; > bool acpi_boot_table_init_done = false, relocated = false; > int ret; > + bool running_on_hypervisor; ... this is semantically ambiguous with cpu_has_hypervisor. Where they differ is whether Xen has managed to recognise the hypervisor it is running under, or not. Given that the hypervisor_*() hooks are nops by default, I'd suggest just making blind calls. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
