Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] xen: make available hvm_fep to non-debug build as well

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>]

>>> On 23.06.16 at 14:44, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 06:20:38AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 23.06.16 at 12:50, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 09:42:38AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 20.06.16 at 18:30, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>> >> > @@ -97,9 +98,17 @@ boolean_param("hap", opt_hap_enabled);
>> >> >  
>> >> >  #ifndef opt_hvm_fep
>> >> >  /* Permit use of the Forced Emulation Prefix in HVM guests */
>> >> > -bool_t opt_hvm_fep;
>> >> > +bool_t __read_mostly opt_hvm_fep;
>> >> >  boolean_param("hvm_fep", opt_hvm_fep);
>> >> >  #endif
>> >> > +static const char __initconst *warning_hvm_fep =
>> >> > +    "**********************************************\n"
>> >> > +    "******* WARNING: HVM FORCED EMULATION PREFIX IS AVAILABLE\n"
>> >> > +    "******* This option is *ONLY* intended to aid testing of Xen.\n"
>> >> > +    "******* It has implications on the security of the system.\n"
>> >> > +    "******* Please *DO NOT* use this in production.\n"
>> >> > +    "**********************************************\n";
>> >> > +
>> >> >  
>> >> 
>> >> Along with the same comment as on patch 2, here even more than
>> >> there I wonder whether this string wouldn't better be a static local
>> >> in hvm_enable() (or even the scope therein where warning_add()
>> >> gets invoked).
>> > 
>> > I would rather the text stays next to where the option is defined so
>> > it is obvious to anyone who touches this area of code.
>> 
>> Makes sense. But then - shouldn't it move inside the #ifndef?
>> 
> 
> That would then require the warning_add() call to be wrapped in ifdef,
> too. That looks a bit cumbersome to me.

Ah, right. Well, never mind then - the compiler will (hopefully) take
care of eliminating the unused string then.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel