Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/6] domain: stash xen_domctl_createdomain flags in struct domain

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 30 July 2019 10:26
> To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: JulienGrall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>; Andrew Cooper 
> <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>; George Dunlap
> <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>; Stefano 
> Stabellini
> <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Konrad Rzeszutek 
> Wilk
> <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>; Tim (Xen.org) <tim@xxxxxxx>; Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/6] domain: stash xen_domctl_createdomain 
> flags in struct domain
> 
> On 30.07.2019 11:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 25.07.2019 15:39, Paul Durrant wrote:
> >> --- a/xen/include/xen/sched.h
> >> +++ b/xen/include/xen/sched.h
> >> @@ -306,6 +306,7 @@ enum guest_type {
> >>
> >>    struct domain
> >>    {
> >> +    unsigned int     options;         /* copy of createdomain flags */
> >>       domid_t          domain_id;
> >>
> >>       unsigned int     max_vcpus;
> >
> > I was about to commit this when I noticed the placement here:
> > I think it would be pretty good to retain domain_id as the
> > first field. I'll be happy to make that adjustment while
> > committing, as long as you are fine with me doing so.
> 
> And I realize I should have said where I'd want to put it: I
> think it wants to go next to guest_type, so that once that
> field goes away structure layout (i.e. holes and overall size)
> is the same again.

Ok, I don't really mind.

  Paul

> 
> Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel