Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] xen/x86: merge 2 hvm_event_... functions into 1

[Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>]

On 02/15/2016 07:54 PM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
> On 2/15/2016 7:47 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Corneliu ZUZU <czuzu@bitdefender.com
>> <mailto:czuzu@bitdefender.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 2/15/2016 10:30 AM, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>>
>>         On 02/15/2016 08:35 AM, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
>>
>>             This patch merges almost identical functions
>>             hvm_event_int3 and
>>             hvm_event_single_step into a single function called
>>             hvm_event_breakpoint.
>>             Also fixes event.c file header comment in the process.
>>
>>             Signed-off-by: Corneliu ZUZU
>>             <<mailto:czuzu@bitdefender.com>czuzu@bitdefender.com>
>>             ---
>>               xen/arch/x86/hvm/event.c        | 108
>>             +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>               xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c      |  15 +++---
>>               xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/event.h |  11 ++--
>>               3 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>>
>>         Looks good to me.
>>
>>         Acked-by: Razvan Cojocaru
>>         <<mailto:rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
>>
>>
>>         Thanks,
>>         Razvan
>>
>>
>> If the patch hasn't been merged to staging yet then include it. If
>> it's a longer series the cover page can indicate which patches are
>> still in need of review and which ones have been already acked.
>> Furthermore, for each patch under the Signed-off-by tag you can say
>> what changed in each revision. If nothing changed, you can say no
>> change or just don't put anything for that revision. See
>> <http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-02/msg00943.html>http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-02/msg00943.html
>> for an example. Also keep in mind that if the changes in a revision
>> are significant enough you can't keep the Acked-by tag on the patch,
>> it will need to be re-acked.
>>
>> Tamas
> 
> Got it, thanks.

This particular patch did make it into staging. It's
557c7873f35aa39bd84977b28948457b1b342f92.