Re: hypercall_xlat_continuation()

[Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>]

Ok. Even if I can't make it clearer, at least I'll add few lines of comments 
explaining what's going on, after (and if) I figure it out.

Jan,

It seems assumption is made that a 64bit dom0 will not have a 32bit app making 
hypercall?

BUG_ON(*reg != (unsigned int)*reg);  <====

can you please explain the rationale? Also, can you please comment on other 
checks, dwiddling with mask, setting *id to *reg value, etc. in this function?


thanks,
Mukesh (starting a new campaign against overuse of ## macros in xen)




Keir Fraser wrote:
> Jan wrote it and may still understand it. He's your best hope. If as a
> result you think you can make it clearer, please send a patch. :-)
> 
>  -- Keir
> 
> On 22/05/2009 03:57, "Mukesh Rathor" <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>> Can someone please explain the madness in the else part of this function? The
>> caller magically passes 2 for mask? Is this already documented anywhere by
>> chance for mortals like me :).
>>
>> thanks,
>> Mukesh
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>