Re: [PATCH 0/1] ARM: Implement support for write-ctrlreg vm-events

[Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>]

>>> With that said, another thing crossed my mind. Since the DENY flag will
>>> be implemented for ARM w/ the next
>>> revision and the actual write will be done on the scheduler tail,
>>> similarly to X86 ((hvm_do_resume), wouldn't
>>> it be good if we separated the code that checks monitor_write_data from
>>> there into an arch-dependent function,
>>> e.g. vm_event_monitor_write_data? That way the scheduler tail function
>>> won't be 'polluted' w/ that code and IMHO
>>> it will make the vm-events design more clear (since that functionality
>>> will also be in vm_event.c along w/ the other
>>> vm_event_* functions).
>> Sounds good, except perhaps for the function name but I'm not sure what
>> a better one might be unfortunately, maybe someone else with chime in
>> with a suggestion.
> 
> I was thinking of the option of giving this function the significance of
> it being called by the
> scheduler tail, i.e. just before "entering" a vcpu, in which case we
> could use a name
> like vm_event_schedtail.
> To me this sounds pretty good since it generalizes the function and it
> makes sense to have
> a vm_event_* function that is called just before a vcpu is scheduled,
> i.e. a vm-events function
> that would add-in a "final touch" before the "final stage" of actually
> entering the vcpu.
> 
> Let me know what you think.

Sounds good to me. Let's see if somebody else objects.


Thanks,
Razvan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel