Re: [PATCH 5/7] xen: rename various functions referencing dom0

[Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>]

On 03/19/2014 05:13 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 18.03.14 at 22:34, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
>> @@ -50,10 +50,8 @@ custom_param("dom0_mem", parse_dom0_mem);
>>    */
>>   #define DOM0_FDT_EXTRA_SIZE (128 + sizeof(struct fdt_reserve_entry))
>>
>> -struct vcpu *__init alloc_dom0_vcpu0(void)
>> +struct vcpu *__init alloc_dom0_vcpu0(struct domain *dom0)
>>   {
>> -    struct domain *dom0 = hardware_domain;
>> -
>>       if ( opt_dom0_max_vcpus == 0 )
>>           opt_dom0_max_vcpus = num_online_cpus();
>>       if ( opt_dom0_max_vcpus > MAX_VIRT_CPUS )
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/setup.c
>> @@ -759,7 +759,7 @@ void __init start_xen(unsigned long boot_phys_offset,
>>
>>       /* Create initial domain 0. */
>>       hardware_domain = dom0 = domain_create(0, 0, 0);
>> -    if ( IS_ERR(dom0) || (alloc_dom0_vcpu0() == NULL) )
>> +    if ( IS_ERR(dom0) || (alloc_dom0_vcpu0(dom0) == NULL) )
>
> Any reason why a change like this can't be done right away in the
> earlier patch introducing the local "dom0" variables, reducing the
> overall churn?
>
> Jan

I was trying to restrict the earlier patch to just variable renames,
with this patch covering function names (and prototypes). I could move
this change back, or just merge the patches if "rename dom0->hwdom"
does not end up being an overly large patch.

-- 
Daniel De Graaf
National Security Agency