>>> On 31.08.16 at 05:56, <feng...@intel.com> wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c > @@ -207,8 +207,6 @@ void vmx_pi_hooks_assign(struct domain *d) > ASSERT(!d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.vcpu_block); > > d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.vcpu_block = vmx_vcpu_block; > - d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.pi_switch_from = vmx_pi_switch_from; > - d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.pi_switch_to = vmx_pi_switch_to; > d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.pi_do_resume = vmx_pi_do_resume; > }
I'm sure I've said so before: While I can see why you want the adjustment to vmx_pi_hooks_deassign(), I don't see why leaving out this and ... > @@ -236,6 +232,12 @@ static int vmx_domain_initialise(struct domain *d) > if ( (rc = vmx_alloc_vlapic_mapping(d)) != 0 ) > return rc; > > + if ( iommu_intpost ) > + { > + d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.pi_switch_from = vmx_pi_switch_from; > + d->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.pi_switch_to = vmx_pi_switch_to; > + } > + > return 0; > } ... this would conflict with the goal of the patch. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel