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: [PATCH] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] support console resolutions better tha

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] support console resolutions better than 80x25
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:59:26 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:00:31 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C1067544.DCE%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: Aca/yWuHqlSmuiu8EduTIwAKle7CWAAAfXf6
Thread-topic: [PATCH] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] support console resolutions better than 80x25
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/

On 14/8/06 6:45 pm, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Sounds like it'd be better to make slot 0 the default and require override
> if the user really cares about the BIOS font data. That sounds a lot less
> likely than someone trying to use the higher-res text mode on an ATI adapter
> and getting confused when it doesn't work!
> It'd be nice if we could also have the Linux-style linearfb code, so we
> could use the higher res graphics modes. I suppose that would be a lot more
> work though, and should fit in the framework that this patch provides (in
> particular, the info structure passed to domain0 should be able to support
> that, right)?

Also, the union in start_info would be clearer as (assuming this doesn't
change the offset/size of any fields, which I don't think it does):
 union {
    struct {
    } normal;
    struct {
    } init;
 } domain;

Apart from being clearer, the Sun compiler doesn't like anonymous unions so
we try to avoid them.

By the way: please just send further patches against your previous
mega-patch. :-)

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>