22 messages in com.xensource.lists.xen-develRe: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND] PV dri...
FromSent OnAttachments
Ky Srinivasan18 Oct 2006 06:51.patch
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com18 Oct 2006 16:55 
Ky Srinivasan19 Oct 2006 06:53 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com20 Oct 2006 03:11 
Ky Srinivasan20 Oct 2006 06:54 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com22 Oct 2006 18:44 
DOI Tsunehisa23 Oct 2006 19:53.patch
Ian Campbell24 Oct 2006 08:26 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com24 Oct 2006 16:53 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com24 Oct 2006 20:11 
Ian Campbell25 Oct 2006 04:03 
Ian Campbell25 Oct 2006 04:03 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com25 Oct 2006 17:13 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com25 Oct 2006 17:15 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com25 Oct 2006 20:57 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com25 Oct 2006 23:36 
Ian Campbell26 Oct 2006 07:14 
Doi....@jp.fujitsu.com26 Oct 2006 21:11 
Ian Campbell27 Oct 2006 02:39 
Kasai Takanori27 Oct 2006 04:43 
Kasai Takanori01 Nov 2006 15:55 
Ian Campbell02 Nov 2006 02:00 
Subject:Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND] PV drivers for HVM guests
From:Kasai Takanori (kasa@jp.fujitsu.com)
Date:10/27/2006 04:43:36 AM
List:com.xensource.lists.xen-devel

Hi Ian,

How do you think of this patch?

In general we want to avoid adding compatibility bits to generic code and confine it to platform-compat.[ch] wherever possible. You have added code in xencomm.[ch] and hypercall.h which I think we can avoid.

I also try to avoid checking version numbers if I can, preferring to check for the presence of absence of specific definitions instead. This is useful when dealing with kernels with backported bits. Unfortunately it doesn't help with the gfp_t typedef :-( but we'll come to that later.

I've attached my current patch including the ptrace fix from above and the comments from below. Can you give it a go?

I'll try it.

Thanks

- Takanori Kasai