From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] PVH xen: add
 XENMEM_add_to_physmap_range
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:05:00 -0700
Message-ID: <20130515160500.337cd014@mantra.us.oracle.com>
References: <1368579168-30829-1-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
	<1368579168-30829-3-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
	<5193787302000078000D659C@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <5193787302000078000D659C@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, 15 May 2013 10:58:43 +0100
"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

> >>> On 15.05.13 at 02:52, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
> >>> wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm.c
> > @@ -4519,7 +4519,8 @@ static int handle_iomem_range(unsigned long
> > s, unsigned long e, void *p) 
> >  static int xenmem_add_to_physmap_once(
> >      struct domain *d,
> > -    const struct xen_add_to_physmap *xatp)
> > +    const struct xen_add_to_physmap *xatp,
> > +    domid_t foreign_domid)
> >  {
> >      struct page_info *page = NULL;
> >      unsigned long gfn = 0; /* gcc ... */
> > @@ -4646,7 +4647,7 @@ static int xenmem_add_to_physmap(struct
> > domain *d,
> 
> I know I said this before: This patch can't be complete, or else the
> new function parameter would actually get used. With the way
> things are, if this patch gets applied, a user of the new XENMEM_
> sub-op would not get the expected behavior.
> 

No, the new foreign_domid parameter is meaningful for only the 
XENMAPSPACE_gmfn_foreign OP which is defined in patch 0018. So we 
should be OK here.

thanks
Mukesh