On 01/30/15 05:24, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 30.01.15 at 01:52, <dsl...@verizon.com> wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c >> @@ -2599,7 +2599,7 @@ static bool_t hvm_complete_assist_req(ioreq_t *p) >> break; >> } >> >> - return 1; >> + return 0; /* implicitly bins the i/o operation */ >> } > > This change points out that having hvm_complete_assist_req() be a > separate function yet having only a single caller, and it returning > non-void with only a single possible return value isn't the best > arrangement. I think this should be brought back into > hvm_send_assist_req(), by inverting the if() condition there. Unless > there are intentions for it to have another caller, but in that case > it should still be made return void, with the caller choosing what to > return. >
Sounds good to me will do. -Don Slutz > Jan > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
