From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: [PATCH 6 of 8] FPU: create lazy and non-lazy FPU restore functions Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 09:37:17 +0100 Message-ID: <4DC7C3DD020000780004054D@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: , Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Wei Huang2 Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 07.05.11 at 07:42, "Huang2, Wei" wrote: >--- a/xen/arch/x86/i387.c Fri May 06 10:40:22 2011 -0500 >+++ b/xen/arch/x86/i387.c Fri May 06 10:53:35 2011 -0500 >@@ -98,13 +98,13 @@ > /* FPU Save Functions */ > /*******************************/ > /* Save x87 extended state */ >-static inline void fpu_xsave(struct vcpu *v, uint64_t mask) >+static inline void fpu_xsave(struct vcpu *v) This looks okay now to me, only a cosmetic comment: You add the "mask" parameter in patch 5, just to remove it here again. Jan