From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND] PV drivers for HVM guests Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:40:18 +0100 Message-ID: <1161942018.13318.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <4535F8F5.E57C.0030.0@novell.com> Your message of Wed, 18 Oct 2006 07:51:45 -0600. <4535F8F5.E57C.0030.0@novell.com> <200610182356.k9INuAF03840@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <45374AE9.E57C.0030.0@novell.com> Your message of Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:53:42 -0600. <45374AE9.E57C.0030.0@novell.com> <200610201012.k9KACIF29714@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <45389CA5.E57C.0030.0@novell.com> <200610230145.k9N1jGF01307@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <453D8055.4030509@jp.fujitsu.com> <1161703595.22514.59.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200610242354.k9ONsIF02543@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <200610250311.k9P3BwF04686@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <1161774212.22514.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200610260013.k9Q0DuF16474@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <200610260358.k9Q3w4F20001@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <1161872106.22514.170.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200610270411.k9R4BrF06900@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200610270411.k9R4BrF06900@photon.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Doi.Tsunehisa@jp.fujitsu.com Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Kasai Takanori , xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 13:11 +0900, Doi.Tsunehisa@jp.fujitsu.com wrote: > Takanori (he is my co-worker) checked this patch, but it occures > compile error in linux-xen. We are investigating it. Thanks, I'll reply to him in a moment. > >> BTW, I might find a issue about NET_IP_ALIGN in the compatible shim. > >> Currentry, its value is 0, but the value should be matched a value of > >> netback module. Thus, its value should be 2, I think. > >> > >> What do you think about the issue ? > > > > My thinking was that since those older kernels don't define NET_IP_ALIGN > > and don't hardcode the number 2 anywhere they don't expect any extra > > alignment. Therefore using 0 seems correct in terms of behaving the same > > as native drivers do on those versions. I'm not sure I would want to > > backport the addition of the extra padding in our drivers, the distros > > haven't seen the need for example... > > Hmm, I thought that NET_IF_ALIGN mismatch between netfront and netback > occures a confusion of VNIF. But I might be imagining if it was used > correctly. I'd not heard about or seen that problem. Lets leave things as they are and if a problem arises we'll revisit it. > Is it used on SLES9 guest ? I don't have the environment. Yes, I'm compile testing against SLES9sp3 (2.6.5 based) and RHEL4 update 4 (2.6.9 based) kernels. I don't have an IA64 platform to do anything more than that. Ian.