From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olaf Hering Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] xen: preserve COMPAT in CFLAGS Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 15:20:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20190107152016.03464ee3.olaf@aepfle.de> References: <20181026101016.28584-1-olaf@aepfle.de> <20181213110525.GY18875@perard.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7399316956085503910==" Return-path: Received: from us1-rack-dfw2.inumbo.com ([104.130.134.6]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ggVlT-0000zT-II for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2019 14:20:28 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20181213110525.GY18875@perard.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" To: Anthony PERARD Cc: Ian Jackson , Stefano Stabellini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "open list:X86" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============7399316956085503910== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Thu, 13 Dec 2018 11:05:25 +0000 schrieb Anthony PERARD : > Hi, >=20 > Ian, we have those XC_WANT_COMPAT_* #defines to allow consumers of Xen > libs be able to use old interfaces. Do you think it's a good idea to > have this consumers (QEMU here) #undef the flag when it has implemented > the newer interface? I think the wording is wrong. The defines exist to expose existing APIs to software that was not updated = to use the "latest" API. To me it looks like the undef's are wrong. Even th= e usage in configure looks bogus, but that is another unrelated thing. Olaf --Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQSkRyP6Rn//f03pRUBdQqD6ppg2fgUCXDNgIAAKCRBdQqD6ppg2 fu5TAKCMBBZF7gk7Qc47TVW1U8GXd7YH+gCgw8IaNuKH7wgvFE1OgbPlHGXC8XI= =MkI/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7-- --===============7399316956085503910== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KWGVuLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApYZW4tZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMueGVucHJvamVjdC5vcmcKaHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0 cy54ZW5wcm9qZWN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3hlbi1kZXZlbA== --===============7399316956085503910==-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:57445) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggVle-0007Mu-0D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2019 09:20:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggVlc-0004Cl-Ap for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2019 09:20:37 -0500 Received: from mo6-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([2a01:238:20a:202:5300::1]:29590) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggVlb-0003wE-Kz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2019 09:20:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 15:20:16 +0100 From: Olaf Hering Message-ID: <20190107152016.03464ee3.olaf@aepfle.de> In-Reply-To: <20181213110525.GY18875@perard.uk.xensource.com> References: <20181026101016.28584-1-olaf@aepfle.de> <20181213110525.GY18875@perard.uk.xensource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1] xen: preserve COMPAT in CFLAGS List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony PERARD Cc: Ian Jackson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefano Stabellini , "open list:X86" --Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Thu, 13 Dec 2018 11:05:25 +0000 schrieb Anthony PERARD : > Hi, >=20 > Ian, we have those XC_WANT_COMPAT_* #defines to allow consumers of Xen > libs be able to use old interfaces. Do you think it's a good idea to > have this consumers (QEMU here) #undef the flag when it has implemented > the newer interface? I think the wording is wrong. The defines exist to expose existing APIs to software that was not updated = to use the "latest" API. To me it looks like the undef's are wrong. Even th= e usage in configure looks bogus, but that is another unrelated thing. Olaf --Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQSkRyP6Rn//f03pRUBdQqD6ppg2fgUCXDNgIAAKCRBdQqD6ppg2 fu5TAKCMBBZF7gk7Qc47TVW1U8GXd7YH+gCgw8IaNuKH7wgvFE1OgbPlHGXC8XI= =MkI/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/PUzmwa.URpv55AFLiE_WGv7--