On 08/12/2017 09:49, Jan Beulich wrote: >> + * The layout of each entry in the memory map table is as follows and no >> + * padding is used between entries in the array: >> + * >> + * 0 +----------------+ >> + * | addr | Base address >> + * 8 +----------------+ >> + * | size | Size of mapping >> + * 16 +----------------+ >> + * | type | E820_TYPE_xxx >> + * 20 +----------------| > I'm not convinced of re-using E820 types here. I can see that this > might ease the consumption in Linux, but I don't think there should > be any connection to x86 aspects here - the data being supplied is > x86-agnostic, and Linux'es placement of the header is also making > no connection to x86 (oddly enough, the current placement in the > Xen tree does, for a reason which escapes me). FWIW, e820 types are now part of the ACPI standard. So using them is not necessarily related to x86, and reasonably x86-agnostic. Paolo > I could also imagine reasons to add new types without them being > sanctioned by whoever maintains E820 type assignments.
