From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Chen, Tiejun" Subject: Re: [v7][RFC][PATCH 01/13] xen: RMRR fix Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:11:51 +0800 Message-ID: <5452FDF7.9040907@intel.com> References: <1414136077-18599-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com> <544A4B7A0200007800041E0D@mail.emea.novell.com> <544DA74A.4020505@intel.com> <544E214F020000780004253D@mail.emea.novell.com> <544F5570.5050106@intel.com> <544F71270200007800042B51@mail.emea.novell.com> <5450395A.2080703@intel.com> <54505649.1000103@intel.com> <5450B7510200007800042FF1@mail.emea.novell.com> <5451F51B.6080700@intel.com> <54520DF40200007800043608@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54520DF40200007800043608@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: yang.z.zhang@intel.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, tim@xen.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 2014/10/30 17:07, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 30.10.14 at 09:21, wrote: >> I think we just guarantee no one set mem_access for those ranges, but >> its fine to get mem_access: > > Seems reasonable to me, but you'll need to get the respective > maintainers to agree. And of course this needs to be cleaned up; If something is obvious please give me comment kindly. I mean if possible, I hope I can narrow down these bad stuffs before I send them in next revision :) > personally I also dislike the excessive logging of messages that > you add here and elsewhere. Yeah, I noticed you were saying this but as I said, this is not clear to me based on my poor understanding. Thanks Tiejun > > Jan > > >