On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 17:54 -0400, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Rusty Russell wrote: > > Chris: [RFC PATCH 12/33] Change __FIXADDR_TOP to leave room for the hypervisor. > > - Replace with dynamic (Geerd) patch, put in paravirt_ops structure. > > > I'm looking at this, and I'm not sure that there needs to be a void > (*set_fixmap_top)(unsigned long top) entry in paravirt ops. It seems to > me that the hypervisor's init code can call the normal set_fixmap_top() > function (which Geerd's patch introduces) with whatever appropriate > value it needs when it also installs the rest of the paravirt ops > pointers and/or patches. After all, this is something the hypervisor > needs to set in the kernel, rather than something the kernel needs to do > to the hypervisor. > > Does that sound reasonable, or does there really need to be a paravirt > entry for this? > > Also, since this is a pretty generic patch with no earlier dependencies, > we can push it near the front of the patch queue. Actually, I think that it should be something like: #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT #define __FIXADDR_TOP (paravirt_ops.fixaddr_top) #endif Then paravirt_ops.init will set this value in the paravirt_ops struct (just as it will set kernel_rpl). Just back on the ground, Rusty. -- Help! Save Australia from the worst of the DMCA: http://linux.org.au/law
