On 30/01/2019 09:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 29.01.19 at 20:07, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/pv/shim.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/pv/shim.c
>> @@ -40,7 +40,11 @@
>> #undef virt_to_mfn
>> #define virt_to_mfn(va) _mfn(__virt_to_mfn(va))
>>
>> -#ifndef CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE
>> +/* Tolerate "pv-shim" being passed to a CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE
>> hypervisor. */
>> +static bool _discard;
>> +boolean_param("pv-shim", _discard);
>> +#else
>> bool pv_shim;
>> boolean_param("pv-shim", pv_shim);
>> #endif
> It would end up being less extra code if you did
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE
> /* Tolerate "pv-shim" being passed to a CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE hypervisor.
> */
> static bool __initdata pv_shim;
> #else
> bool pv_shim;
> #endif
> boolean_param("pv-shim", pv_shim);
Sadly not. In the EXCLUSIVE case, pv_shim is defined to be 1, and then
you've got an object named with just a number. (I tried this approach
first.)
I can't think of any cleaner solution.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
