On 30/01/2019 11:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 30.01.19 at 11:01, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> 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.)
>
> Oh, that's unfortunate in this particular case. In which case I
> don't have any better suggestion either. One that you and others
> perhaps wouldn't like would be
>
> custom_param("pv-shim", NULL);
>
> with parse_params() suitably adjusted to avoid the call in that
> case.
I'd rather add something like ignore_param("pv-shim") instead (with the
new type OPT_IGNORE).
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
