Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/7] xen/x86: Add mbd.h header file

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 09.09.14 at 15:39, <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:49:15AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 09.08.14 at 01:04, <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/mbd.h
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
>> > +/*
>> > + * Copyright (c) 2013, 2014 Oracle Co., Daniel Kiper
>> > + *
>> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>> > + * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
>> > + * (at your option) any later version.
>> > + *
>> > + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>> > + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> > + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>> > + * GNU General Public License for more details.
>> > + *
>> > + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
>> > + * with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>> > + */
>> > +
>> > +#ifndef __MBD_H__
>> > +#define __MBD_H__
>> > +
>> > +/* Module type. */
>> > +typedef struct {
>> > +    u32 start;
>> > +    u32 end;
>> > +
>> > +    /* Pointer to a module command line. */
>> > +    u32 cmdline;
>> > +
>> > +    /* If relocated != 0 then a given module was relocated. */
>> > +    u32 relocated;
>> > +} boot_module_t;
>> > +
>> > +/*
>> > + * MultiBoot Data (MBD) type. It is used to define variable which
>> > + * carry over data from multiboot protocol (any version) through
>> > + * Xen preloader stage. Later all or parts of this data is used
>> > + * to initialize Xen Boot Info (XBI) structure.
>> > + */
>> > +typedef struct {
>> > +    /* Pointer to boot loader name. */
>> > +    u32 boot_loader_name;
>> > +
>> > +    /* Pointer to Xen command line. */
>> > +    u32 cmdline;
>> > +
>> > +    /*
>> > +     * Amount of lower memory (in KiB) accordingly to The Multiboot
>> > +     * Specification version 0.6.96.
>> > +     */
>> > +    u32 mem_lower;
>> > +
>> > +    /*
>> > +     * Amount of upper memory (in KiB) accordingly to The Multiboot
>> > +     * Specification version 0.6.96.
>> > +     */
>> > +    u32 mem_upper;
>> > +
>> > +    /* Size (in bytes) of memory map provided by bootloader. */
>> > +    u32 mmap_size;
>> > +
>> > +    /* Pointer to memory map provided by bootloader. */
>> > +    u32 mmap;
>> > +
>> > +    /* Number of modules. */
>> > +    u32 mods_nr;
>> > +
>> > +    /* Pointer to modules description (boot_module_t *). */
>> > +    u32 mods;
>> > +} mbd_t;
>> > +#endif /* __MBD_H__ */
>>
>> For several of the fields I wonder whether u32 is really the right
>> data type (i.e. whether u64 wouldn't be more correct going
>> forward).
> 
> All data which we get from multiboot[12] is u32. So, I think it does not
> make sense to use u64 here.

Wasn't your proposal to make this an abstraction? If so, what
does the (current) data source have to do with the types here?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel