On 02.02.2022 13:13, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 10:42:22AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 01.02.2022 13:45, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >>> --- a/xen/include/xen/mm.h >>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/mm.h >>> @@ -554,6 +554,8 @@ int __must_check steal_page(struct domain *d, struct >>> page_info *page, >>> int page_is_ram_type(unsigned long mfn, unsigned long mem_type); >>> /* Returns the page type(s). */ >>> unsigned int page_get_ram_type(mfn_t mfn); >>> +/* Check if a range falls into a hole in the memory map. */ >>> +bool is_memory_hole(paddr_t start, uint64_t size); >> >> While resolving to the same type, these now also want to be >> "unsigned long". > > Doh, yes, sorry. Will convert them to mfn_t if we agree on that.
As said in reply to Julien - I don't mind the change, but in this particular case I also don't view it as strictly necessary / useful. Jan
