Re: [Xen-devel] 3w-xxxx module problems with Xen

To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alex Malinovich <demonbane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] 3w-xxxx module problems with Xen
From:	Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:20:54 +0000
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:21:01 -0700
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<45F6A8CD.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
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:	Acdlcm1uq81kpNFlEduMWwAX8io7RQ==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] 3w-xxxx module problems with Xen
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620

On 13/3/07 12:36, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> (Keir, is this scan-all-functions approach really necessary? Couldn't this
> be done this way just on domU-s?)

It may have been needed once upon a time when some PCI stuff resided inside
Xen. Now that dom0 does the whole lot, we could probably avoid
scan-all-functions, at least for domain0 (since I'm not sure about its
interaction with pcifront, but I expect devices exported via pcifront get
probed in a different way anyway and aren't scanned for at all).

 -- Keir

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

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] 3w-xxxx module problems with Xen