On 07/19/2012 02:41 PM, Anthony PERARD wrote: > On 17/07/12 19:36, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> How about pushing the call into cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags()? >>> Would that reduce the number of call sites? >> >> Pushing the calls to cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags and >> cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_range would make the code much nicer. >> However being these functions in exec-obsolete.h, are they at risk of >> removal? > > I thought about it, but when I saw that set_dirty were called only when > it was not already set as dirty where the call seams to be necessary. > > I just try to call xen_modified_mem only within > cpu_phy_mem_set_dirty_flags but it does not work, even when I tried to > clear the dirtybits. But I maybe don't do the right thing yet to clear > the dirty bits
You can wrap the if (not dirty) make_it_dirty() sequence in a helper, and insert your hypercall in the helper, unconditionally. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
