Re: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_XEN_COMPAT_030002 broken?

["Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Oh, as I'm changing this - is there a reason for pmd_bad() to use PAGE_MASK
rather than PTE_MASK? (I already agreed with Andi that pmd_bad() in native
should be cleaned up to match pgd_bad/pud_bad). Jan

>>> Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 14.11.06 13:42 >>>
On 14/11/06 12:32, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Oh, good point! Okay then the more straightforward XENVER_version check will
>> have to be used: 3.0.3 and newer, versus 3.0.2 and older.
> 
> More strait forward? The .3 is part of extraversion, so in order to do a
> comparison
> one would have to parse that string (and hence make certain assumptions).
> That's
> not nice for use in (early) feature detection. Maybe it'd be better to try and
> write
> a page table entry without PAGE_USER, and check whether that bit got turned
> on implicitly...

Yes, that sounds reasonable.

 -- Keir


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