>>> On 25.08.17 at 15:00, <aisa...@bitdefender.com> wrote: > On Vi, 2017-08-25 at 06:13 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > On 17.08.17 at 13:50, <aisa...@bitdefender.com> wrote: >> > --- a/xen/common/monitor.c >> > +++ b/xen/common/monitor.c >> > @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ int monitor_domctl(struct domain *d, struct >> > xen_domctl_monitor_op *mop) >> > domain_pause(d); >> > d->monitor.guest_request_sync = mop->u.guest_request.sync; >> > d->monitor.guest_request_enabled = requested_status; >> > + d->arch.monitor.guest_request_userspace_enabled = mop- >> > >u.guest_request.allow_userspace; >> This breaks the build on ARM. > There are 2 solutions, I can move the case in x86/monitor.c in > the arch_monitor_domctl_event function or I can make a arch specific > function that does the assignment in the x86 case and does nothing in > the arm case. What approach do you prefer?
That's a question to the maintainers of that code. What I care about is that patches touching common code please are at least build-checked on the other architecture before submission. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel