On 30.11.2020 11:31, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/ioreq.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/ioreq.c
> @@ -36,6 +36,11 @@
> #include <public/hvm/ioreq.h>
> #include <public/hvm/params.h>
>
> +bool ioreq_complete_mmio(void)
> +{
> + return handle_mmio();
> +}
As indicated before I don't like out-of-line functions like this
one; I think a #define would be quite fine here, but Paul as the
maintainer thinks differently. So be it. However, shouldn't this
function be named arch_ioreq_complete_mmio() according to the
new naming model, and then ...
> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/ioreq.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/ioreq.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ unsigned int hvm_broadcast_ioreq(ioreq_t *p, bool buffered);
>
> void hvm_ioreq_init(struct domain *d);
>
> +bool ioreq_complete_mmio(void);
... get declared next to the other arch_*() hooks? With this
Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
Jan
