On 2/15/2016 10:30 AM, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
On 02/15/2016 08:35 AM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
This patch merges almost identical functions hvm_event_int3 and
hvm_event_single_step into a single function called hvm_event_breakpoint.
Also fixes event.c file header comment in the process.
Signed-off-by: Corneliu ZUZU <cz...@bitdefender.com>
---
xen/arch/x86/hvm/event.c | 108 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c | 15 +++---
xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/event.h | 11 ++--
3 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
Looks good to me.
Acked-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojoc...@bitdefender.com>
Thanks,
Razvan
I forgot to ask: when getting an Acked-By response, should I include
that patch in the next patch-series
or ommit it? I've done that w/ the first patch in the last patch-series,
but IDK if I was correct to do so.
Thanks,
Corneliu.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
