On 06/29/2015 06:00 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 26/06/15 22:17, Ed White wrote: >> On 06/24/2015 03:29 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 22/06/15 19:56, Ed White wrote: >>>> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vcpu.h >>>> b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vcpu.h >>>> index 3d8f4dc..a1529c0 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vcpu.h >>>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vcpu.h >>>> @@ -118,6 +118,13 @@ struct nestedvcpu { >>>> >>>> #define vcpu_nestedhvm(v) ((v)->arch.hvm_vcpu.nvcpu) >>>> >>>> +struct altp2mvcpu { >>>> + uint16_t p2midx; /* alternate p2m index */ >>>> + uint64_t veinfo_gfn; /* #VE information page guest pfn */ >>> Please use the recently-introduced pfn_t here. pfn is a more >>> appropriate term than gfn in this case. >> Did you mean pfn_t, or xen_pfn_t? > > Actually I meant gfn_t, per the followup I sent shortly afterwards. > >> I'm having a hard time >> figuring out how to use a pfn_t, I can't even assign >> INVALID_PFN to one. > > Documentation in c/s 177bd5f, example in c/s 24036a5. The point of this > > For now, it will require copious use of _gfn() and gfn_x() until the > rest of the mm subsystem has been updated to use the new typesafe types. >
Understood. I am finding that the re-work to use gfn_t in this and patch 9 is making for very messy code, but I am doing it. Ed _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel