| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: Hypercall number assignment convension (was Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PAT
On 24 Apr 2006, at 02:53, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
I think Rusty's xen share also had a similar problem caused by
the hypercall number conflict.
Xen/ia64 with virtual physical model also needs a hypercall number
for its own use.
Currently it large enough (=256) that it is unlikly to be used by
xen/x86.
Is there any convension about how to take hypercall number?
At least hypercall numbers for arch-specific purpose and
experimental purpose should be defined.
The list of __HYPERVISOR_* defines in public/xen.h in the main xen
repository is the canonical place. For hypercalls in our tree, simply
grabbing the next number in sequence usually makes sense. I'm not sure
whether having structure to the hypercall numbers makes sense (e.g., a
range for arch-specific usage) -- if so then maybe allocating from 64
upwards would make sense.
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home