|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-ia64-devel
Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: remove is_vti
Hi Tristan,
I have two questions.
>diff -r 32ec5dbe2978 -r c5ffe6158794 xen/arch/ia64/xen/dom0_ops.c
>--- a/xen/arch/ia64/xen/dom0_ops.c Fri Nov 30 08:54:33 2007 -0700
>+++ b/xen/arch/ia64/xen/dom0_ops.c Mon Dec 03 06:45:23 2007 +0100
>@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ long arch_do_domctl(xen_domctl_t *op, XE
>
> if (ds->flags & XEN_DOMAINSETUP_query) {
> /* Set flags. */
>- if (d->arch.is_vti)
>+ if (is_hvm_domain (d))
> ds->flags |= XEN_DOMAINSETUP_hvm_guest;
> /* Set params. */
> ds->bp = 0; /* unknown. */
>@@ -104,12 +104,13 @@ long arch_do_domctl(xen_domctl_t *op, XE
> ret = -EFAULT;
> }
> else {
>- if (ds->flags & XEN_DOMAINSETUP_hvm_guest) {
>+ if (is_hvm_domain (d)
>+ || (ds->flags & XEN_DOMAINSETUP_hvm_guest)) {
Why should we check both flags?
Is XEN_DOMAINSETUP_hvm_guest flag for xm restore command?
> if (!vmx_enabled) {
> printk("No VMX hardware feature for vmx domain.\n");
> ret = -EINVAL;
> } else {
>- d->arch.is_vti = 1;
>+ d->is_hvm = 1;
Why should we set is_hvm flag?
I think that is_hvm flag was already set in domain_create().
> xen_ia64_set_convmem_end(d, ds->maxmem);
> ret = vmx_setup_platform(d);
> }
Best regards,
Kan
Mon, 3 Dec 2007 06:46:19 +0100, tgingold@xxxxxxx wrote:
>Hi,
>
>in fact is_vti is a duplicate of is_hvm. This patch remove the ia64 is_vti
>flag.
>
>Tristan.
>
>-------------------------------text/plain-------------------------------
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
>Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
|
|
|
|