On 16/07/18 15:05, Paul Durrant wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>> @@ -976,14 +976,13 @@ unsigned long hvm_cr4_guest_valid_bits(c
>>
>> static int hvm_load_cpu_ctxt(struct domain *d, hvm_domain_context_t *h)
>> {
>> - int vcpuid;
>> + unsigned int vcpuid = hvm_load_instance(h);
>> struct vcpu *v;
>> struct hvm_hw_cpu ctxt;
>> struct segment_register seg;
>> const char *errstr;
>>
>> /* Which vcpu is this? */
>> - vcpuid = hvm_load_instance(h);
>> if ( vcpuid >= d->max_vcpus || (v = d->vcpu[vcpuid]) == NULL )
> This open coded pattern:
>
> vcpuid = hvm_load_instance(h);
> if ( vcpuid >= d->max_vcpus || (v = d->vcpu[vcpuid]) == NULL )
> { ...
>
> seems to be repeated an awful lot. Is it time, perhaps, to introduce a helper
> function that incorporates the check?
In some copious free time when I can post v2 of my "fix max_vcpus"
series, all of this logic (and much more) will become redundant and get
culled.
I really wouldn't waste time re-factoring it at this point.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
