On Mi, 2018-06-06 at 06:38 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 06.06.18 at 14:24, <[email protected]> wrote: > > @@ -394,7 +380,7 @@ static int vmce_load_vcpu_ctxt(struct domain > > *d, hvm_domain_context_t *h) > > return err ?: vmce_restore_vcpu(v, &ctxt); > > } > > > > -HVM_REGISTER_SAVE_RESTORE(VMCE_VCPU, vmce_save_vcpu_ctxt, > > +HVM_REGISTER_SAVE_RESTORE(VMCE_VCPU, vmce_save_vcpu_ctxt_one, > > vmce_load_vcpu_ctxt, 1, HVMSR_PER_VCPU); > Also, I'm inclined to say "of course", the functions shouldn't have a > _one > suffix anymore by the end of this series, possibly even making it > unnecessary to touch this and the other similar constructs at all. > Ok, I'll fix this in the next version.
Can you give me an insight into how you see the splitting of this patch further? Thanks, Alex ________________________ This email was scanned by Bitdefender _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
