WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-ia64-devel] Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND] PV drivers for HVM guest

To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND] PV drivers for HVM guests
From: Doi.Tsunehisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 13:11:53 +0900
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:12:23 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:15:06 +0100. <1161872106.22514.170.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4535F8F5.E57C.0030.0@xxxxxxxxxx> Your message of Wed, 18 Oct 2006 07:51:45 -0600. <4535F8F5.E57C.0030.0@xxxxxxxxxx> <200610182356.k9INuAF03840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45374AE9.E57C.0030.0@xxxxxxxxxx> Your message of Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:53:42 -0600. <45374AE9.E57C.0030.0@xxxxxxxxxx> <200610201012.k9KACIF29714@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45389CA5.E57C.0030.0@xxxxxxxxxx> <200610230145.k9N1jGF01307@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <453D8055.4030509@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1161703595.22514.59.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610242354.k9ONsIF02543@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610250311.k9P3BwF04686@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1161774212.22514.86.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610260013.k9Q0DuF16474@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200610260358.k9Q3w4F20001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><1161872106.22514.170.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Ian,

You (Ian.Campbell) said:
> I'd much prefer it if we can find a way to avoid encoding specific RHEL
> kernel versions as you had in your patch. I've gone with
>       #define gfp_t unsigned
> which basically ignores any existing typedef. I think this is OK in this
> instance since gfp_t has always been 
   .....
> My current patch is below, it cross-compiles for IA64 without warnings
> against RHEL4.4 and SLES9sp3. Could you let me know if it works for you?
> If so would you mind submitting the ia64 bits via the ia64 maintainer.
> I'll apply the unmodified_drivers bits.

  Takanori (he is my co-worker) checked this patch, but it occures
compile error in linux-xen. We are investigating it.

>>   BTW, I might find a issue about NET_IP_ALIGN in the compatible shim.
>> Currentry, its value is 0, but the value should be matched a value of
>> netback module. Thus, its value should be 2, I think.
>> 
>>   What do you think about the issue ?
>
> My thinking was that since those older kernels don't define NET_IP_ALIGN
> and don't hardcode the number 2 anywhere they don't expect any extra
> alignment. Therefore using 0 seems correct in terms of behaving the same
> as native drivers do on those versions. I'm not sure I would want to
> backport the addition of the extra padding in our drivers, the distros
> haven't seen the need for example...

  Hmm, I thought that NET_IF_ALIGN mismatch between netfront and netback
occures a confusion of VNIF. But I might be imagining if it was used
correctly.

  Is it used on SLES9 guest ? I don't have the environment.

Thanks,
- Tsunehisa Doi

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel