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/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: Hypercall number assignment convension (was Re: [Xen-devel] Re:[PATC

To: "Isaku Yamahata" <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Hypercall number assignment convension (was Re: [Xen-devel] Re:[PATCH]: kexec: framework and i386)
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:34:37 +0800
Cc: Akio Takebe <takebe_akio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Magnus Damm <magnus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:35:29 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcZo1qSqkG6dmdukR0WoSd3kniBRLwAAr/Dw
Thread-topic: Hypercall number assignment convension (was Re: [Xen-devel] Re:[PATCH]: kexec: framework and i386)
>From: Isaku Yamahata
>Sent: 2006年4月26日 10:10
>On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:32:09AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
>> The list of __HYPERVISOR_* defines in public/xen.h in the main xen
>> repository is the canonical place. For hypercalls in our tree, simply
>> grabbing the next number in sequence usually makes sense. I'm not
>> whether having structure to the hypercall numbers makes sense (e.g.,
>> range for arch-specific usage) -- if so then maybe allocating from 64
>> upwards would make sense.
>Actually xen/ia64 requires only one hypercall number for now.
>I attached the patches to take one.
>I'm not sure what name you prefer, so I attached two patches.
>Please apply which you prefer. (or invent whatever name you like.)

I prefer to the first one. However not the current 
__HYPERVISOR_arch_specific_0, *_1, *_2, ..., how about just call 
it as __HYPERVISOR_arch_specific_ops which contains another 
namespace defined by different architecture seperately?


Xen-devel mailing list