linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Xen acpi pad implement

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:43:03 -0500
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	"Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@...el.com>
Cc:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xen.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Xen acpi pad implement

On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 04:23:57PM +0000, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> >> Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> >>> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/Makefile b/drivers/xen/Makefile
> >>>>>> index 0e86370..a2af622 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/xen/Makefile
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/Makefile
> >>>>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_MCE_LOG)           += mcelog.o
> >>>>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND)     += xen-pciback/
> >>>>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_PRIVCMD)            += xen-privcmd.o
> >>>>>>  obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_ACPI_PROCESSOR)     += xen-acpi-processor.o
> >>>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_XEN_DOM0)                       += xen_acpi_pad.o
> >>>>>>  xen-evtchn-y                         := evtchn.o
> >>>>>>  xen-gntdev-y                         := gntdev.o
> >>>>>>  xen-gntalloc-y                               := gntalloc.o
> >>>> 
> >>>> it should really depend on ACPI and maybe also X86, otherwise it
> >>>> is going to break the ARM build 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Hmm, XEN_DOM0 has already depended on ACPI and X86_LOCAL_APIC
> >>> (which depends on X86_64). 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> Ah, you and Konrad are right. I ignore XEN_DOM0 varies under
> >> different arch. (But seems it not depends on X86 since it's
> >> logically an acpi stuff?). 
> > 
> > If it is generic ACPI code, than it can depend only on ACPI.
> > If it is ACPI code that contains X86 specific info, than it needs to
> > depend on X86 too.
> 
> No x86 specific so let's depend on ACPI.

Huh? This feature is x86 specific isn't it? I mean it is in the ACPI spec, but
only x86 does it right?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/