[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] RE: One question to compat model
>-----Original Message----- >From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 4:48 PM >To: Jiang, Yunhong; Jan Beulich >Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: One question to compat model > >On 13/05/2010 09:41, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Whoever implemented XENPF_getidletime decided to stuff a fake xenctl_cpumap >>> struct within Xen rather than properly refactor the public headers. There's >>> no reason not to move xenctl_cpumap out into xen.h. >> >> A curios question. I checked the code, and notice that the >XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_64 >> is only defined for __XEN__ or __XEN_TOOLS__. I can understand it is needed >> for tools because 32bit tools can be used in 64bit dom0, but why it is >> forbidden for kernel? To avoid it be passed as hypercall parameter? Sorry for >> bothering if this is a stupid question :$ > >I was probably being overzealous. There's no good reason not to use >GUEST_HANDLE_64 and uint64_aligned_t outside of tools interfaces. Althoug not related with my current patch, but curiosly, will it avoid the compat model issue if we use XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_64 for hypercall, especially if not performance critical, like struct xen_mc_fetch? (Maybe we still need consider the #pragma pack optoin for the struction?) --jyh > > -- Keir > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |