From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Don Slutz <don.slutz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 5/8] xen: Add vmware_port support
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:15:03 -0500
Message-ID: <5676F027.6030101@Gmail.com>
References: <1448747105-19966-1-git-send-email-Don.Slutz@Gmail.com>
	<1448747105-19966-6-git-send-email-Don.Slutz@Gmail.com>
	<56718D6702000078000C04D2@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <56718D6702000078000C04D2@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>, Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 12/16/15 10:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 28.11.15 at 22:45, <don.slutz@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ---
>> v13:
>>   Changed to uint32_t arch_flags, since the emulation_flags is this.
> 
> I don't really understand this sentence, and I also don't understand
> why you couldn't just use another XEN_X86_EMU_ flag, e.g.
> XEN_X86_EMU_VMWARE_PORT (which would be the first one outside
> the current all-or-nothing model).
>

Next attempt at that sentence:

During re-base of the patch, changed uint64_t arch_flags to uint32_t
arch_flags.  This appeared to be ok because the added emulation_flags
was a unit32_t.

I have no reason not to use another XEN_X86_EMU_ flag.  It was not clear
when I was re-baseing that it would be ok to do so.

Will drop arch_flags and use XEN_X86_EMU_VMWARE_PORT which will not be
added to "all".

   -Don Slutz


> Jan
>