From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [patch 09/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: remove HAVE_ARCH_MM_LIFETIME, define no-op architecture implementations Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:48:40 -0800 Message-ID: <45E47D08.5020802@goop.org> References: <20070227081337.434798469@goop.org> <20070227081632.356636957@goop.org> <1172589358.3408.2.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <45E46889.9090801@goop.org> <1172597726.3408.25.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <45E470D6.7050401@goop.org> <1172599480.3408.28.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1172599480.3408.28.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: James Bottomley Cc: Zachary Amsden , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Rusty Russell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wright , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org James Bottomley wrote: > Yes ... I forgot about that ... we'd need an asm/mmu_context_paravirt.h > on every arch. > Yep. And I'm not too keen on that name; one could imagine other uses for those hooks, even if they're being used for x86 paravirtualization in this instance. > I suppose this is just me being lazy ... I'm currently doing a bit of a > rewrite in asm-parisc/mmu_context.h and I didn't want a massive merge > conflict. > Well, I'm happy to create asm-generic/mm_hooks.h or something, and reduce all the changes to asm-*/mmu_context.h to a one-liner. J