| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [qemu] xen_be_init under stubdom
Kamala Narasimhan writes ("[Xen-devel] [PATCH] [qemu] xen_be_init under
stubdom"):
> Do nothing in xen_be_init under stubdom plus a minor inconsequential cleanup.
...
> - goto cleanup;
> + return;
...
> -cleanup:
> qemu_free(vec);
> }
I don't think this is a helpful change. There is nothing wrong with
calling qemu_free(0) and IMO in general functions that "goto cleanup"
are to be preferred to ones that "return".
Furthermore, even if this patch were good, it's not a bugfix so is not
acceptable at this stage of the release.
> @@ -646,6 +645,10 @@ static void xen_be_evtchn_event(void *opaque)
>
> int xen_be_init(void)
> {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_STUBDOM
> + return 0;
> +#endif
I don't understand this at all. Why should stubdom not be able to
make pv backends if it wants to ? I agree that it probably doesn't
want to but if something iswrongly causing it to then the right fix is
to make it not do so.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home