From: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Petr Vandrovec <petr@vmware.com>,
Chaz Masden <zamsden@gmail.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>,
Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Paravirt: fix export of paravirt-ops to binary modules
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:25:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46292FB2.5030404@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4628D64A.4070900@goop.org>
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>
>> Basic idea looks good.
>>
>> But is the 5 argument support really needed? I don't see any paravirt
>> ops functions that needs it and even if there was one it still wouldn't be clear
>> if it made sense to export it.
>>
>
> 64-bit args are passed as a pair of 32-bit args, so PAE set_pte_at*
> functions end up with 5 args. They're used often, so they may be worth
> patching, but I'm not sure if they're worth exporting. They are
> implicitly exported in a non-PARAVIRT build by the fact that they're
> inline functions/macros in a header. I don't know if any modules
> actually use them.
>
Yes, I don't know either - but we should be consistent about their
export regardless of whether PAE is selected or not. So we should
either have 5 arg macros or not export set_pte_at* at all, even in 4 arg
version.
Zach
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-20 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-20 1:52 [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Paravirt: fix export of paravirt-ops to binary modules Zachary Amsden
2007-04-20 9:34 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-20 15:03 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-20 21:25 ` Zachary Amsden [this message]
2007-04-20 21:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-20 21:36 ` Zachary Amsden
2007-04-20 23:01 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-20 23:02 ` Zachary Amsden
2007-04-22 23:37 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-22 23:49 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-23 0:24 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-23 0:49 ` Andi Kleen
2007-04-23 1:04 ` Rusty Russell
2007-04-23 21:18 ` Zachary Amsden
2007-04-23 1:00 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46292FB2.5030404@vmware.com \
--to=zach@vmware.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=petr@vmware.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=zamsden@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).