On 11.07.2019 19:13, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr( >> >> ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty || !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt)); >> } >> + >> + if ( curr->arch.vm_event && >> + curr->arch.vm_event->send_event && > > Why not fold these checks into hvm_emulate_send_vm_event since..
I had asked for at least the first of the checks to be pulled out of the function, for the common case to be affected as little as possible. >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c >> @@ -3224,6 +3224,14 @@ static enum hvm_translation_result __hvm_copy( >> return HVMTRANS_bad_gfn_to_mfn; >> } >> >> + if ( unlikely(v->arch.vm_event) && >> + v->arch.vm_event->send_event && > > .. you seem to just repeat them here again? I agree that the duplication makes no sense. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel