[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120801111937.4c9b3702@mantra.us.oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:19:37 -0700
From: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@...cle.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
Ian.Campbell@...rix.com, tim@....org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/24] xen: update xen_add_to_physmap interface
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:52:15 -0400
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 04:34:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Update struct xen_add_to_physmap to be in sync with Xen's version
> > of the structure.
> > The size field was introduced by:
> >
> > changeset: 24164:707d27fe03e7
> > user: Jean Guyader <jean.guyader@...citrix.com>
> > date: Fri Nov 18 13:42:08 2011 +0000
> > summary: mm: New XENMEM space, XENMAPSPACE_gmfn_range
> >
> > According to the comment:
> >
> > "This new field .size is located in the 16 bits padding
> > between .domid and .space in struct xen_add_to_physmap to stay
> > compatible with older versions."
> >
> > This is not true on ARM where there is not padding, but it is valid
> > on X86, so introducing size is safe on X86 and it is going to fix
> > the interace for ARM.
>
> Has this been checked actually for backwards compatibility? It sounds
> like it should work just fine with Xen 4.0 right?
>
> I believe this also helps Mukesh's patches, so CC-ing him here for
> his Ack.
Yup, I already had that change in my tree.
thanks,
Mukesh
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists