Yes, you are right, this line should be removed.Thanks for splitting these up. On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 10:07 +0000, ANNIE LI wrote:[...]return value + * by bit operations. + */ + int (*query_foreign_access)(grant_ref_t); +}; + +static struct gnttab_ops gnttab_v1_ops;You don't actually need this forward declaration since the struct definition and usage are ordered correctly.
Actually no, just keep the original name of this function. I'd like to change it, maybe gnttab_update_entry_v1 is better?+static struct gnttab_ops gnttab_v1_ops = { + .map_frames = gnttab_map_frames_v1, + .unmap_frames = gnttab_unmap_frames_v1, + .update_entry = update_grant_entry_v1,Any reason this one is not gnttab_foo?
Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel