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-ppc-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] /dev/mem and xlate_dev_mem_ptr*()

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] /dev/mem and xlate_dev_mem_ptr*()
From: Jimi Xenidis <jimix@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 08:16:58 -0500
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-ppc-devel <xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 05:17:21 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C1E10060.7E86%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>
References: <C1E10060.7E86%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jan 27, 2007, at 8:13 AM, Keir Fraser wrote:

On 27/1/07 12:49 pm, "Jimi Xenidis" <jimix@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

in the 2.6.18 linux of the sparse tree you have:
drivers/xen/char/mem.c  using xlate_dev_mem_ptr as 2 args.

What is the story with this? has the interface changed from under you?
Why not invent a new interface that does not conflict, since this is
your code?

The functions are used only by the /dev/mem driver so really they belong to
us, if you choose to build with our alternative driver. The original
interface is unimplementable over Xen (since we do not have 1:1 mappings of everything). If those changes get merged upstream I would expect a size
parameter would get added to the function in upstream too.

Respectfully, my guess would be that the maintainers would ask that "your" driver to not overload an existing interface and make your own, I know the PPC maintainers would, especially since we all share a single binary.
-JX



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

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