RE: [patch] "flags" bits need shifting (was Re: [Xen-devel] Late

To:	"Scott Parish" <srparish@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	RE: [patch] "flags" bits need shifting (was Re: [Xen-devel] Latest bk canNOT compile on x86_64)
From:	"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Tue, 31 May 2005 22:55:52 -0700
Cc:	David F Barrera <dfbp@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Wed, 01 Jun 2005 05:55:18 +0000
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcVmPmEoHMIge8t0SXCkSzGYuwr8AgAL2h2Q
Thread-topic:	[patch] "flags" bits need shifting (was Re: [Xen-devel] Latest bk canNOT compile on x86_64)

Scott Parish wrote:
> This patch gets me to a prompt on dom0 x86_64. Its probably not the
> perfect solution, but the hypercall interface is under discussion
> anyway. 
> 
> Should be pretty self explanitory--l?e_create_phys is expecting flag
> bits in the scruntched format, and we were passing in the
> unscruntched format. 
> 
> sRp

Great. I double-checked it, and it worked. Good to know the breakage by
the scary PAE patch was not so big (as far as we know at this point ;-)

Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center

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

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

RE: [patch] "flags" bits need shifting (was Re: [Xen-devel] Latest bk ca