Re: [PATCH] arm/monitor vm-events: Implement guest-request support

From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
	Corneliu ZUZU <czuzu@bitdefender.com>
Cc: Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@tklengyel.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
	Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xen.org,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm/monitor vm-events: Implement guest-request support
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:05:49 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56C73D5D.3080903@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1602191559390.17248@kaball.uk.xensource.com>

On 19/02/16 16:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
>> On 2/19/2016 3:49 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +    if ( sync )
>>>> +    {
>>>> +        req->flags |= VM_EVENT_FLAG_VCPU_PAUSED;
>>>> +        vm_event_vcpu_pause(v);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>> +#if CONFIG_X86
>>>> +    if ( altp2m_active(d) )
>>> I would rather
>>>
>>> #define altp2m_active(d) (0)
>>>
>>> on ARM, removing the two ifdefs in this file.
>> Yeah, I actually wanted to get rid of that too at some point, the question is,
>> what do I do with "req->altp2m_idx = vcpu_altp2m(v).p2midx"? I'm not familiar
>> w/ altp2m design, maybe someone that knows more of the internals of that can
>> give a suggestion.
> If you #define altp2m_active to (0), gcc will automatically avoid the if
> statement.

You will still get the compile error from ARM's struct vcpu not having
altp2m information.

~Andrew