On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:26:07AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 17.03.17 at 12:14, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c
> > @@ -3537,7 +3537,7 @@ static void nmi_hwdom_report(unsigned int reason_idx)
> > {
> > struct domain *d = hardware_domain;
> >
> > - if ( !d || !d->vcpu || !d->vcpu[0] || !is_pv_domain(d) /* PVH fixme */
> > )
> > + if ( !d || !d->vcpu || !d->vcpu[0] || !is_pv_domain(d) )
> > return;
>
> But why would you remove the comment then? This needs fixing,
> after all.
>
Isn't PVHv2 going to use the native path? Now that there is no PVHv1,
what is there to fix?
Wei.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
