Re: [PATCH 4/4] kexec/xen: directly load images images into Xen

Simon Horman
2013-11-19T09:19:53Z

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 09:28:27AM +0100, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:20:14AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 02:55:22PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
> > > From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
> > >
> > > Xen 4.4 has an improvided kexec hypercall ABI that allows images to be
> > > loaded and executed without any kernel involvement. Use the API
> > > provided by libxc to load images when running in a Xen guest.
> > >
> > > Support for loading images via the kexec_load syscall in non-upstream
> > > ("classic") Xen kernels is no longer supported.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>
> > > ---
> > > kexec/Makefile | 1 +
> > > kexec/arch/i386/crashdump-x86.c | 20 +++++-
> > > kexec/crashdump-xen.c | 34 ++++++++++
> > > kexec/crashdump.h | 3 +-
> > > kexec/kexec-xen.c | 139 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > kexec/kexec.c | 24 +++++--
> > > kexec/kexec.h | 5 ++
> > > 7 files changed, 218 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > create mode 100644 kexec/kexec-xen.c
> > >
>
> [...]
>
> > I have applied the following follow-up patch to resolves some errors.
> > Let me know if I messed it up.
> >
> > From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> >
> > [PATCH] kexec/xen: Correct some compile errors
> >
> > Correct various problems introduced by
> > 08cf823704b0fa3b ("kexec/xen: directly load images images into Xen").
> >
> > These all relate to the case here HAVE_LIBXENCTRL is not set.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> > ---
> > kexec/kexec-xen.c | 7 +++----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kexec/kexec-xen.c b/kexec/kexec-xen.c
> > index 77f65c0..e885246 100644
> > --- a/kexec/kexec-xen.c
> > +++ b/kexec/kexec-xen.c
> > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
> > #include <stdio.h>
> > #include <string.h>
> > #include <stdlib.h>
> > +#include <stdlib.h>
>
> Thanks for fixes but why are you including stdlib.h twice?

Sorry, that is an error.