On 2/23/16 10:34 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 23.02.16 at 09:34, <feng...@intel.com> wrote:
>
>> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/hvm.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/hvm.h
>> @@ -565,6 +565,12 @@ const char *hvm_efer_valid(const struct vcpu *v,
>> uint64_t value,
>> signed int cr0_pg);
>> unsigned long hvm_cr4_guest_reserved_bits(const struct vcpu *v, bool_t
>> restore);
>>
>> +#define arch_vcpu_block(v) ({
>> \
>> + void (*func) (struct vcpu *) =
>> (v)->domain->arch.hvm_domain.vmx.vcpu_block;\
>> + if ( func )
>> \
>> + func(v);
>> \
>> +})
>
> See my comment on v12. The code structure actually was better
> there, and all you needed to do is introduce a local variable.Wouldn't this be a bit cleaner (and type-safier (inventing a word here)) to do with a static inline function? -- Doug Goldstein
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
