>>> On 19.05.16 at 11:05, <yu.c.zh...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > @@ -5507,6 +5507,8 @@ long do_hvm_op(unsigned long op, > XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg) > get_gfn_query_unlocked(d, a.pfn, &t); > if ( p2m_is_mmio(t) ) > a.mem_type = HVMMEM_mmio_dm; > + else if ( t == p2m_ioreq_server ) > + a.mem_type = HVMMEM_ioreq_server; > else if ( p2m_is_readonly(t) ) > a.mem_type = HVMMEM_ram_ro; > else if ( p2m_is_ram(t) )
I can see this being suitable to be done here, but ... > @@ -5537,7 +5539,8 @@ long do_hvm_op(unsigned long op, > XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg) > [HVMMEM_ram_rw] = p2m_ram_rw, > [HVMMEM_ram_ro] = p2m_ram_ro, > [HVMMEM_mmio_dm] = p2m_mmio_dm, > - [HVMMEM_unused] = p2m_invalid > + [HVMMEM_unused] = p2m_invalid, > + [HVMMEM_ioreq_server] = p2m_ioreq_server > }; > > if ( copy_from_guest(&a, arg, 1) ) ... how can this be correct without actual handling having got added? IOW doesn't at least this change belong into a later patch? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel