Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, RFC 0/5] various small improvements and cleanup

[Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>]

Yes, these all look fine to me. Actually I'm not sure whether we really need
a general-purpose sort (patch 1/5). But I suppose we could use it in places
like extable.c, so we might as well have it.

 -- Keir

On 22/12/2010 12:04, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This patch set is only loosely connected (with the exception of the first
> two patches and some ordering dependencies to apply cleanly), and is
> known to apply only to c/s 22467. I'm posting in the hope to get
> eventual review comments in order to then possibly do a re-submission
> once the large set of changes currently pending in the staging tree
> passed regression testing.
> 
> Patch 1/5: make sort() generally available
> Patch 2/5: x86-64: use PC-relative exception table entries
> Patch 3/5: x86: link time .data section adjustments
> Patch 4/5: x86: avoid unlikely taken forward branches
> Patch 5/5: use bool_t for various boolean variables
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel



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