>>> On 09.04.18 at 15:33, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] >> Sent: 09 April 2018 14:24 >> To: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org> >> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; Paul Durrant >> <paul.durr...@citrix.com>; Jun Nakajima <jun.nakaj...@intel.com>; Kevin >> Tian <kevin.t...@intel.com>; Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com> >> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] x86/HVM: alter completion-needed checking >> >> The function only looks at the ioreq_t, so pass it a pointer to just >> that. Also use it in hvmemul_do_io(). >> >> Suggested-by: Paul Durrant <paul.durr...@citrix.com> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >> --- >> RFC: While this avoids some open coding, generated code looks to be >> worse for that particular case. I'm therefore not certain that we >> want this change (or perhaps just the function name/signature >> change portion). >> > > FAOD my reason for suggesting it was such that exactly the same test > implementation is used in all cases to decide whether I/O completion is > needed.
So does that mean you think the change is worthwhile? If so, do you have any comments, or are you willing to ack it (despite it not really being a 4.11 candidate at this point in time)? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
