From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [HVM] Fix 64 bit PV-on-HVM driver builds
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:57:37 +0100
Message-ID: <C28CC231.1032E%keir@xensource.com>
References: <1b64e7ec0706061142h4d81c7admc90973924826f94b@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <1b64e7ec0706061142h4d81c7admc90973924826f94b@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Dave Lively <dlively@virtualiron.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 6/6/07 19:42, "Dave Lively" <dlively@virtualiron.com> wrote:

> I've also separated this x86_64 case from the i386 case.  We end up
> including the same file
> (unmodified_drivers/linux-2.6/compat-include/asm-generic/pgtable-nopud.h)
> in either case, but it was pretty confusing the way I had it mixed in
> with the i386 case.

In the patch it's pgtable-nopmd.h. But pgtable-nopud.h makes more sense
(x86/64 Linux has always had proper pmds). So is the patch incorrect?

Also, this could be placed inside asm-x86_64/mach-xen/asm/hypervisor.h,
couldn't it?

 -- Keir