Re: [PATCH] xen/arm: use masking operation instead of test_bit for MCSF bits

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 12:46 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> This is a follow of commit 90f2e2a307fc6a6258c39cc87b3b2bf9441c0fa7 "use
> masking operation instead of test_bit for MCSF bits" where the ARM
> changes were missing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@citrix.com>

Acked + applied.

> ---
>  xen/arch/arm/domain.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
> index 880d0a6..1b0f9eb 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain.c
> @@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ void hypercall_cancel_continuation(void)
>      struct cpu_user_regs *regs = guest_cpu_user_regs();
>      struct mc_state *mcs = &current->mc_state;
>  
> -    if ( test_bit(_MCSF_in_multicall, &mcs->flags) )
> +    if ( mcs->flags & MCSF_in_multicall )
>      {
>          __clear_bit(_MCSF_call_preempted, &mcs->flags);
>      }
> @@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ unsigned long hypercall_create_continuation(
>  
>      va_start(args, format);
>  
> -    if ( test_bit(_MCSF_in_multicall, &mcs->flags) )
> +    if ( mcs->flags & MCSF_in_multicall )
>      {
>          __set_bit(_MCSF_call_preempted, &mcs->flags);
>  

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