Re: [PATCH v2 17/23] x86/mm: put paging_update_nestedmode under CONFIG_HVM

From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 17/23] x86/mm: put paging_update_nestedmode under CONFIG_HVM
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 04:50:21 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5B8528ED02000078001E2870@prv1-mh.provo.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4f2a5de72552edce4bafe5d049ee89a18531ed1f.1535285866.git-series.wei.liu2@citrix.com>

>>> On 26.08.18 at 14:19, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/paging.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/paging.c
> @@ -919,6 +919,7 @@ const struct paging_mode *paging_get_mode(struct vcpu *v)
>      return paging_get_nestedmode(v);
>  }
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HVM
>  void paging_update_nestedmode(struct vcpu *v)
>  {
>      ASSERT(nestedhvm_enabled(v->domain));
> @@ -930,6 +931,7 @@ void paging_update_nestedmode(struct vcpu *v)
>          v->arch.paging.nestedmode = NULL;
>      hvm_asid_flush_vcpu(v);
>  }
> +#endif

Just a consideration (no objection): Would it be worthwhile to
introduce CONFIG_NESTED_HVM at the same time (for now hard
coded to Y, and of course depending on HVM) to avoid having to
touch all such places a second time later on?

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel