Isaku Yamahata wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 01:09:48PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > >> Isaku Yamahata wrote: >> >>> On xen/ia64 and xen/powerpc hypercall arguments are passed by pseudo >>> physical address (guest physical address) so that it's necessary to >>> convert from virtual address into pseudo physical address. The frame >>> work is called xencomm. >>> Import arch generic part of xencomm. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/xen/Makefile | 1 + >>> drivers/xen/xencomm.c | 232 >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> include/xen/interface/xencomm.h | 41 +++++++ >>> include/xen/xencomm.h | 77 +++++++++++++ >>> >>> >> There's no Kconfig for this. >> >> What ends up using xencomm? Could we defer adding it until there's an >> in-tree user? >> > > We are in a dilemma. > ia64/xen needs xencomm so that it needs common xencomm code. > However merging common xencomm code needs the real user i.e. ia64/xen. > > Another user of xencomm is powerpc/xen which isn't merged into > upstream. So another choice would be > - put the file into ia64 specific directory and > merge the file through linux-ia64. > When another user appears (possibly powerpc/xen), > move the file into common place (drivers/xen). > > We're now struggling for ia64/xen domU merge, so we want to make > ia64/xen domU patch series as small as possible. > Putting the file into drivers/xen is desirable for that. > However either way is ok. > Which way do you want (putting common dir or ia64 specfic dir)? No, it's fine as-is. J _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization