>>> On 05.02.18 at 17:47, <brian.wo...@amd.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 02:09:15AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> If the latter check was moved to the caller, the whole function
>> would perhaps be better placed in nestedsvm.c?
>
> I thought about putting it in nestedsvm.c but I thought having it as a
> static function would be better. I could move it to nestedsvm.c
> though.
>
>> Can you please avoid "== 0" and "== 1" on boolean fields (even
>> if, like in the case here, the bitfield has u64 as underlying type,
>> which is sort of pointless)?
>
> svm.c is older and uses "== X", and I was trying to keep it consistent
> within the file. For things like if () {\n,} \{, which are
> inconsistent, I always use if () \n \{. Should I only be using boolean?
Well, unless one of the maintainers of the file objects, I think it
would be better to adjust your patch.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
