[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/cpu-policy: move CPU policy library code
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 19:00:22 +0000
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=citrix.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=citrix.com; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=Ib1f9QBLGjD/v61YoZiiOIvTrgkbf+TPCvCpl3nyHDg=; b=KgJc9LraQnI6xUa8s2QgU2wHtFoXXLApMDy81yqaXoYouNaE9jrHdwJzpZvhZqB2aLwSc0+czAaBXtvKJBnuBFY9KM0ejfna1ik5VNQLBFWl92MNeLl4Z5yj2v4HDUsHmQFxnvXEdw0iF1pE3gsdZ26ctaCy/u0b6NTWa5c2CDOJngOeTRMKacGebwyKgKPQK7Z0qP8DGqYQB5Alok2hIS3Q+dbg2FlPIQGweQZacU1C25zMdhg2GBlsTNM4Ppg1ik7kvOp7VXGlXfvSKfCXY0roYxstU+gliQMnU7Eq8RWyVriON0C+ILX6ImRE0lwp7Pht7wSPSUCmp+TqFAklXQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=rhYZHL/rNQPtFAZeFPWct/y8iNWup5v1cF5/fDPcykWAYTzfLktYrX3JnJ57NyewD88qj8mvU2q4Cvd1QtyP+kaVQh9Qkju3zTQkzuE2MS+D/DFf7ArSz8Ut6W+B9SJQdBID8ArwWOxpmEFwoBY0m4YbF78N1raxKGuIanaUFhFxFgw4e9QzwUIV7QbN5Qj4u+O0QTAnqXRXgapGO8Bxxx5KW3xv4CZHuwQZT+7KmRj/ixOs26s3dwCu8sQEjNNMY5+GC3gTh0X03I0tICxS6fosLYu5dAQIgMF8y4YMGNX8YbtHrdFq2WQpicCn9dUpl9IQkAM3IgNSopUwFDoqwA==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=citrix.com;
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 19:00:38 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 02/02/2026 4:26 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 02.02.2026 16:47, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 07/01/2026 2:17 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/arch.mk b/xen/arch/x86/arch.mk
>>> index 0203138a819a..be6c76d2934b 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/arch.mk
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/arch.mk
>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>> export XEN_IMG_OFFSET := 0x200000
>>>
>>> ARCH_LIBS-y += arch/x86/lib/lib.a
>>> +ALL_LIBS-y += arch/x86/lib/cpu-policy/lib.a
>> This wants to extend ARCH_LIBS-y surely? Is this a rebasing oversight?
> No, this was deliberate. The functions here are different from those in
> arch/x86/lib/lib.a. We don't need to fear collision with "common code"
> ones. Hence I preferred to use the more "normal" placement into what's
> passed to the linker.
I agree that we don't have the explicit ordering requirement that we
have with arch/x86/lib/lib.a.
But, it still reads as bogus to be putting arch/x86/lib/cpu-policy/lib.a
in the non-ARCH list.
What difference is there having this a little earlier in the linker
arguments? Nothing AFAICT.
~Andrew
|
