From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boris Ostrovsky Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/nHVM: generic hook adjustments Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 11:50:40 -0400 Message-ID: <558D74D0.5070506@oracle.com> References: <558D313C020000780008A126@mail.emea.novell.com> <558D688C.7040706@oracle.com> <558D8EEE020000780008A6E4@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8Vu5-0001EZ-M4 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:50:57 +0000 In-Reply-To: <558D8EEE020000780008A6E4@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Kevin Tian , Keir Fraser , suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, Andrew Cooper , chegger@amazon.de, Eddie Dong , Aravind Gopalakrishnan , Jun Nakajima , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 06/26/2015 11:42 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 26.06.15 at 16:58, wrote: >> On 06/26/2015 05:02 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> >>> -uint64_t nsvm_vcpu_guestcr3(struct vcpu *v) >>> -{ >>> - return vcpu_nestedsvm(v).ns_vmcb_guestcr3; >>> -} >>> - >> If this is removed then I don't see why we still need ns_vmcb_guestcr3, >> I don't see it being used anywhere except for being assigned a value. > I think in this patch I shouldn't remove any structure fields. > Perhaps a follow-up patch by one of the SVM maintainers? > > Jan > OK. (I am also adding Christoph since I think he was the one who spent most of the time on nested SVM code.) -boris