This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] blkif.h in sparse tree

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] blkif.h in sparse tree
From: Gary Pennington <Gary.Pennington@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:31:32 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:26:29 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C3E06307.1CA3D%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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>
Organization: Solaris Kernel Development; Sun Microsystems, Inc.
References: <20080219100505.GA14875@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C3E06307.1CA3D%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Gary Pennington <gary.pennington@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 10:42:15AM +0000, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 19/2/08 10:05, "Gary Pennington" <Gary.Pennington@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I'm puzzled as to why:
> > 
> > linux-2.6-xen-sparse/include/xen/blkif.h
> > 
> > includes functionality which looks as though it should be common to all
> > OS implementations.
> It's just glue, and uses gcc-specific pragmas which are not portable across
> compilers. We could stick a BSD license string at the top of the header.

The pragmas which aren't portable could be protected by appropriate macros
and it would be the responsibility of anyone using non-gcc compilers to
provide appropriate support for their environment.

I appreciate that it's not terribly significant, but anyone who needs
to provide support for a 32 bit PV guest on a 64 bit host would
need code remarkably similar to this and so I don't think it's Linux
specific. That's why I suggested re-locating it because it might make
life simpler for other developers in the future.

If it's really not a good idea to re-locate it, then I think a BSD license
would be an acceptable substitute for my purposes.



>  -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>