On 18/08/17 13:08, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 04:08:44AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> If it can't be static anymore, and considering it's just a wrapper
>> around another function call, would there be anything wrong with
>> making it an inline function in the header?
> Yes it can
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 04:08:44AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.08.17 at 16:44, wrote:
> > @@ -5138,13 +5140,6 @@ static int ptwr_emulated_cmpxchg(
> > container_of(ctxt, struct ptwr_emulate_ctxt, ctxt));
> > }
> >
> > -static int
>>> On 17.08.17 at 16:44, wrote:
> @@ -5138,13 +5140,6 @@ static int ptwr_emulated_cmpxchg(
> container_of(ctxt, struct ptwr_emulate_ctxt, ctxt));
> }
>
> -static int pv_emul_is_mem_write(const struct x86_emulate_state *state,
> -
On 17/08/17 15:44, Wei Liu wrote:
> Export it via pv/emulate.h. In the mean time it is required to
> include pv/emulate.h in x86/mm.c.
>
> The said function will be used later by different emulation handlers
> in later patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Liu
Acked-by: Andrew
Export it via pv/emulate.h. In the mean time it is required to
include pv/emulate.h in x86/mm.c.
The said function will be used later by different emulation handlers
in later patches.
Signed-off-by: Wei Liu
---
xen/arch/x86/mm.c | 9 ++---