From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V4 4/5] xen,
 libxc: Request page fault injection via libxc
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:09:31 +0300
Message-ID: <53E0913B.2070309@bitdefender.com>
References: <1407151825-3843-1-git-send-email-rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>	<1407151825-3843-4-git-send-email-rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>	<53DFB4270200007800029147@mail.emea.novell.com>	<53DFA022.9000100@bitdefender.com>
	<53DFC0D30200007800029228@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <53DFC0D30200007800029228@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@intel.com, ian.campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, eddie.dong@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, jun.nakajima@intel.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 08/04/2014 06:20 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 04.08.14 at 17:00, <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com> wrote:
>> On 08/04/2014 05:26 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 04.08.14 at 13:30, <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com> wrote:
>>>> +    __vmread(VM_ENTRY_INTR_INFO, &ev);
>>>> +
>>>> +    if ( (ev & INTR_INFO_VALID_MASK) &&
>>>> +         hvm_event_needs_reinjection((ev >> 8) & 7, ev & 0xff) )
>>>
>>> Are there no manifest constants for all these plain numbers?
>>
>> If there are, vmx_vmcs_save() in vmx.c (line 416) doesn't use them. I've
>> copied that part verbatim.
> 
> And that's precisely the problem: As long as there's exactly one use
> site, the need for manifest constants is questionable (i.e. largely
> cosmetic). As soon as there are multiple places, connecting them
> together is largely impossible without naming these numbers - only
> that way you have a reasonable chance to find the clone of the
> original should the original be found to need tweaking.

I'll gladly add #defines for those magic constants, but could you please
recommend names for them and a header (or at least, category of headers)
to put them in, in the interest of minimizing the number of RFC versions
for this series?


Thanks,
Razvan Cojocaru