On 11/10/2016 04:25 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 03:35 AM, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>>
>> +bool hvm_get_pending_event(struct vcpu *v, struct hvm_trap *info)
>> +{
>> + info->cr2 = v->arch.hvm_vcpu.guest_cr[2];
>> + return hvm_funcs.get_pending_event(v, info);
>> +}
>
> I believe it was Jan who requested that cr2 update be factored out but I
> feel it's better to keep it in the hvm op and not break up
> initialization of the info structure across multiple routines. The code
> size may increase (by a few bytes) but I think it will be more readable.
I am fine with either approach, though obviously I had originally
favoured your preference for the same reasons.
Jan, would it be OK to switch back to the original code here?
Thanks,
Razvan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
