| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: user/hypervisor address space solution
On Feb 15, 2006, at 5:23 AM, Keir Fraser wrote:
Should be called get_guest/put_guest/copy_from_guest/copy_to_guest.
Better names, and the arch-specific old functions can still keep their
old names.
I don't think I understood your full meaning before, but I'm with you
now. get/put_user() will still exist on x86 and mean virtual addresses
(kernel or user). The new get/put_guest_offset() implementations will
be equivalent.
PowerPC will implement get/put_guest_offset(), but will not implement
get/put_user() at all. If those latter calls do make their way into
common code (after the PPC code has been merged), every PPC build in
the regression test suite will fail, so the patch will be flagged as
bad and not committed.
This sounds fine to me, other than that bit about confusing the word
"user" to mean "virtual" (since it could of course be a kernel address
as well).
--
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home