From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [V10 PATCH 08/23] PVH xen: Introduce PVH guest type
 and some basic changes.
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 09:57:35 +0100
Message-ID: <52035D7F.9080403@eu.citrix.com>
References: <1374631171-15224-1-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
	<1374631171-15224-9-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
	<CAFLBxZYmwGCg2WEg0vd8dejCXQgfVvMcCj5mUuSMVTvwszbm+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<5200FE6402000078000E99A1@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<CAFLBxZZev_SiCoXpdJWcYY6SLo6Nt5+yixhZ_y3oHOZWDBta2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130806162646.6c55bf47@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<52020FE9.4020408@eu.citrix.com>
	<CAFLBxZbLRUvGingP1XFMLnm20TKLLhaogRCm6XoKV69aoPq8-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130807153749.7df805b9@mantra.us.oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130807153749.7df805b9@mantra.us.oracle.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: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Cc: "keir.xen@gmail.com" <keir.xen@gmail.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 07/08/13 23:37, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 14:10:27 +0100
> George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:14 AM, George Dunlap
>> <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> And the changelog does say it:
>>>>
>>>> "Note, we drop the const qualifier from vcpu_show_registers() to
>>>>    accomodate the hvm function call in guest_kernel_mode()."
>>>
>>> I said *exact function*.  guest_kernel_mode() doesn't need it
>>> non-const; it needs it because of a function that it calls.  That
>>> in turn doesn't need it non-const either -- it needs it because of
>>> the next one down.  Who *actually* needs vcpu to be non-const, way
>>> down at the bottom?  That's what I need to know to understand why
>>> we can't just change each of those functions to const all the way
>>> down.
>> The general principle here is that you have already done the work of
>> tracing through the code to figure out what's going on; you should
>> cache that information in the commit log so that reviewers (and people
>> doing archaeology) don't need to duplicate the effort.
> I can't remember exact function that can't allow const, but there
> are tons of leaf calls being passed v. Anyways, I'll recreate the
> crime scene, and put in the comment log.

I appreciate it, thanks.

  -George