Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 05/14] Nested Virtualization: core

[Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Tim,

It looks like I have missed this from your first review. Thanks for bringing
this up again.

On Monday 09 August 2010 14:38:48 Tim Deegan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > +int
> > +nestedhvm_vcpu_destroy(struct vcpu *v)
> > +{
> > +   int ret = 0;
> > +
> > +   if (!nestedhvm_enabled(v->domain))
> > +           return 0;
> > +
> > +   if (nestedhvm_vcpu_in_guestmode(v)) {
> > +           nestedhvm_vcpu_exit_guestmode(v);
> > +           ret = -EBUSY;
> > +   }
>
> This still bothers me, since we go on to complete the teardown anyway,
> and this function's only caller does nothing interesting with the
> result.

I removed "vcpu in guestmode" check completely.

> > +   /* Enable interrupts or the guest won't see any interrupts
> > +    * after nested guest exited.
> > +    */
> > +   nestedsvm_vcpu_stgi(v);

This stgi call is gone.

> > +
> > +   hvm_nestedhvm_vcpu_destroy(v);
>
> While I'm complaining about unchecked return values, I should point out
> that your implementation of this returns an integer (which in turn is
> always 0).

I changed this to 'return hvm_nestedhvm_vcpu_destroy(v);'

> > +   return ret;

This return is gone.

> > +}


Christoph

-- 
---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel