Re: [V10 PATCH 18/23] PVH xen: add hypercall support for PVH

[Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 10:20:39 +0100
George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

> On 08/08/13 03:12, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 17:43:54 +0100
> > George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Mukesh Rathor
> >> <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:
....
> >>> +/* PVH 32bitfixme. */
> >>> +static hvm_hypercall_t *const
> >>> pvh_hypercall64_table[NR_hypercalls] = {
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(platform_op),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(memory_op),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(xen_version),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(console_io),
> >>> +    [ __HYPERVISOR_grant_table_op ]  = (hvm_hypercall_t
> >>> *)hvm_grant_table_op,
> >>> +    [ __HYPERVISOR_vcpu_op ]         = (hvm_hypercall_t
> >>> *)hvm_vcpu_op,
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(mmuext_op),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(xsm_op),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(sched_op),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(event_channel_op),
> >>> +    [ __HYPERVISOR_physdev_op ]      = (hvm_hypercall_t
> >>> *)hvm_physdev_op,
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(hvm_op),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(sysctl),
> >>> +    HYPERCALL(domctl)
> >>> +};
> >> It would be nice if this list were in the same order as the other
> >> lists, so that it is easy to figure out what calls are common and
> >> what calls are different.
> > These are ordered by the hcall number, and assists in the debug.
> 
> That makes sense.  What about adding a "prep" patch which
> re-organizes the other lists by hcall number?  I'm not particular
> about which order, I just think they should be the same.

Jan is going to redo this anyways, so I'm gonna leave as is.

thanks,
mukesh