From: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Petr Vandrovec <petr@vmware.com>,
Chaz Masden <zamsden@gmail.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Paravirt: fix export of paravirt-ops to binary modules
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:25:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46292FB2.5030404@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4628D64A.4070900@goop.org>
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>
>> Basic idea looks good.
>>
>> But is the 5 argument support really needed? I don't see any paravirt
>> ops functions that needs it and even if there was one it still wouldn't be clear
>> if it made sense to export it.
>>
>
> 64-bit args are passed as a pair of 32-bit args, so PAE set_pte_at*
> functions end up with 5 args. They're used often, so they may be worth
> patching, but I'm not sure if they're worth exporting. They are
> implicitly exported in a non-PARAVIRT build by the fact that they're
> inline functions/macros in a header. I don't know if any modules
> actually use them.
>
Yes, I don't know either - but we should be consistent about their
export regardless of whether PAE is selected or not. So we should
either have 5 arg macros or not export set_pte_at* at all, even in 4 arg
version.
Zach
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-20 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-20 1:52 [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Paravirt: fix export of paravirt-ops to binary modules Zachary Amsden
2007-04-20 9:34 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-20 15:03 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-20 21:25 ` Zachary Amsden [this message]
2007-04-20 21:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-20 21:36 ` Zachary Amsden
2007-04-20 23:01 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-20 23:02 ` Zachary Amsden
2007-04-22 23:37 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-22 23:49 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-23 0:24 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-23 0:49 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-23 1:04 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-23 21:18 ` Zachary Amsden
2007-04-23 1:00 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46292FB2.5030404@vmware.com \
--to=zach@vmware.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=petr@vmware.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=zamsden@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.