Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 02/16] x86/boot: remove multiboot1_header_end from symbol table

[Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:21:24AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 20.08.16 at 00:43, <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Its visibility is not needed and just pollute symbol table.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> With Andrew effectively having NAK-ed v4 of this patch, I don't see
> why - without further argumentation - this has been included again.

I have saw that discussion stopped somewhere in the middle, so, I was
not sure what is your final decision. However, if you approve/agree
Andrew's NAK then I think that we should use "multiboot2_header_end"
label instead of .Lmultiboot2_header_end in patch #9 (x86: add multiboot2
protocol support). Just to be in line with multiboot (v1) protocol header.

Daniel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel