Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, RFC 0/5] various small improvements and cleanup

[Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>]

On 22/12/2010 13:29, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>>> On 22.12.10 at 14:25, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Yes, these all look fine to me. Actually I'm not sure whether we really need
>> a general-purpose sort (patch 1/5). But I suppose we could use it in places
>> like extable.c, so we might as well have it.
> 
> That's where it gets used (in patch 2).

Ah yes. Put that bit in a separate patch.

 -- Keir

> Jan
> 
>> On 22/12/2010 12:04, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> This patch set is only loosely connected (with the exception of the first
>>> two patches and some ordering dependencies to apply cleanly), and is
>>> known to apply only to c/s 22467. I'm posting in the hope to get
>>> eventual review comments in order to then possibly do a re-submission
>>> once the large set of changes currently pending in the staging tree
>>> passed regression testing.
>>> 
>>> Patch 1/5: make sort() generally available
>>> Patch 2/5: x86-64: use PC-relative exception table entries
>>> Patch 3/5: x86: link time .data section adjustments
>>> Patch 4/5: x86: avoid unlikely taken forward branches
>>> Patch 5/5: use bool_t for various boolean variables
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 
> 
> 



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