From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] xen: introduce vcpu_block and
 vcpu_block_enable_events
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:45:31 +0100
Message-ID: <CD9BFAAB.22634%keir.xen@gmail.com>
References: <5176532102000078000CFC78@nat28.tlf.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: <5176532102000078000CFC78@nat28.tlf.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>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Cc: julien.grall@citrix.com, tim@xen.org, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 23/04/2013 08:23, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

>>>> On 22.04.13 at 22:00, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 22/04/2013 18:42, "Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Rename do_block to vcpu_block.
>>> 
>>> Move the call to local_event_delivery_enable out of vcpu_block, to a new
>>> function called vcpu_block_enable_events.
>>> 
>>> Use vcpu_block_enable_events instead of do_block throughout in
>>> schedule.c
>> 
>> While you're there, could you make both vcpu_block variants return void?
> 
> And I don't see why vcpu_block_enable_events() needs to
> become non-static...

I must admit that I don't mind, no reason not to make it part of the API of
the scheduler, even if noone else uses it yet. OTOH I don't have a very
strong opinion either way.

 -- Keir

> Jan
>