On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 04:25:36PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 29.11.2021 16:33, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > > Introduce an interface that returns a specific leaf/subleaf from a cpu > > policy in xen_cpuid_leaf_t format. > > > > This is useful to callers can peek data from the opaque > > xc_cpu_policy_t type. > > > > No caller of the interface introduced on this patch. > > > > Note that callers of find_leaf need to be slightly adjusted to use the > > new helper parameters. > > Is this sentence a leftover from an earlier version? I can't associate > it with anything.
Yes, looks like. Will remove it. > > --- a/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c > > +++ b/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c > > @@ -855,6 +855,29 @@ int xc_cpu_policy_update_msrs(xc_interface *xch, > > xc_cpu_policy_t *policy, > > return rc; > > } > > > > +int xc_cpu_policy_get_cpuid(xc_interface *xch, const xc_cpu_policy_t > > *policy, > > + uint32_t leaf, uint32_t subleaf, > > + xen_cpuid_leaf_t *out) > > Is it common practice in libxc / libxg to have xch parameters even if > they're unused? I think it's good practice, as if we ever need to add to use ERROR or similar from those functions we would require xch, and it's better to avoid having to change the interface later. Thanks, Roger.
