On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com> wrote:

On 02/18/2016 09:35 PM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
> This patch adds ARM support for guest-request monitor vm-events.
>
> Summary of changes:
> == Moved to common-side:
>   * XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_EVENT_GUEST_REQUEST handling (moved from X86
>       arch_monitor_domctl_event to common monitor_domctl)
>   * hvm_event_guest_request, hvm_event_traps (also added target vcpu as param)
>   * guest-request bits from X86 'struct arch_domain' (to common 'struct domain')
> == ARM implementations:
>   * do_hvm_op now handling of HVMOP_guest_request_vm_event => calls
>       hvm_event_guest_request (as on X86)
>   * arch_monitor_get_capabilities: updated to reflect support for
>       XEN_DOMCTL_MONITOR_EVENT_GUEST_REQUEST
>   * vm_event_init_domain (does nothing), vm_event_cleanup_domain
> == Misc:
>   * hvm_event_fill_regs renamed to arch_hvm_event_fill_regs, no longer
>       X86-specific. ARM-side implementation of this function currently does
>       nothing, that will be added in a separate patch.

We should probably take into account what happens with Tamas' "vm_event:
consolidate hvm_event_fill_regs and p2m_vm_event_fill_regs" patch here.
That patch already affects hvm_event_fill_regs().

Well it seems one of us will have to rebase depending which patch gets accepted & merged first. The conflict is minimal so it's not a major issue. If my patch gets merged first then just have to introduce the empty function in the ARM header with the new name.

Tamas