From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [Bug #11254] KVM: fix userspace ABI breakage Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:23:30 +0300 Message-ID: <48B28822.1010103@qumranet.com> References: <20080824192714.GC1627@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080824192714.GC1627-re2QNgSbS3j4D6uPqz5PAwR5/fbUUdgG@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Adrian Bunk Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Adrian Bunk wrote: > The discussion in Bugzilla whether it is a regression at all can be > condensed to the following question: > > Can a struct that is part of the 2.6.26 userspace headers be defined to > be part of an "experimental ABI" and therefore be changed? > It is part of the experimental ABI. However, as I'm going to apply your patch (as being the simplest fix, and as there is no measurable performance impact), the question is moot. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function