Re: [PATCH] xen: reserve next two XENMEM_ op numbers for future/out-of-tree use

[Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>]

On 28/11/2012 22:03, "Dan Magenheimer" <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com> wrote:

> xen: reserve next two XENMEM_ op numbers for future/out-of-tree use
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>

There was some discussion on whether these numbers should just have
XENMEM_reserved_oracle_{1,2} definitions, or similar. Or even just reserved
by a header comment. Does anyone have any strong opinions?

 -- Keir

> diff --git a/xen/include/public/memory.h b/xen/include/public/memory.h
> index f1ddbc0..3ee2902 100644
> --- a/xen/include/public/memory.h
> +++ b/xen/include/public/memory.h
> @@ -421,6 +421,12 @@ struct xen_mem_sharing_op {
>  typedef struct xen_mem_sharing_op xen_mem_sharing_op_t;
>  DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_mem_sharing_op_t);
>  
> +/*
> + * Reserve ops for future/out-of-tree "claim" patches (Oracle)
> + */
> +#define XENMEM_claim_pages                  24
> +#define XENMEM_get_unclaimed_pages          25
> +
>  #endif /* defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__) */
>  
>  #endif /* __XEN_PUBLIC_MEMORY_H__ */