Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v12] introduce XENMEM_reserved_device_memory_map

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 22.07.15 at 14:52, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Looking through the older comments, it seems like there was a
> conclusion to have an XSM check here, which isn't present here?

Hmm, did I lose track of such a request?

> It looks like Tim and Ian's comments have been addressed (so far as
> they were agreed to at the time).
> 
> WRT the comments Julien raised: at some point (early on) you said this
> was only intended to be used by the toolstack. In which case can it not
> be done in one of the unstable interfaces (e.g. sysctl I suppose is the
> obvious one)?

Oh, indeed. There was so much back and forth here - I thought
hvmloader is to use this interface (and it was doing so at some
point), but that's not the case. So yes, we don't really need to
guarantee stability (but we'd need to move the definitions into
a suitable block then). Still I think the altered layout with the
union at the end is preferable (if only to reduce churn).

Jan


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