| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] kexec trouble
On 5/12/06 3:53 pm, "Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I think we need either wrapper functions for machine_kexec_* functions
>> which dispatch to the correct function depending on the environment
>> (dom0 vs domU, later also native) or just make them function pointers to
>> archive the same effect. Same goes for the KEXEC_ARCH_HAS_PAGE_MACROS
>> stuff. IMHO "#ifdef CONFIG_XEN" should go away from the core code (i.e.
>> kernel/kexec.c).
>
> You mean for the paravirt stuff? Isn't paravirt basically a set of
> callbacks that you can register? If so, what is stopping us from
> registering a set of paravirt callbacks for the kexec code?
I think partly Gerd's point is that CONFIG_XEN in kernel/kexec.c will never
get merged upstream. Guaranteed.
The kexec/kdump patches are not very tidy in some respects like this. We
applied them now because the functionality is useful, but I don't think we
yet have the finished polished article. Also you got away with it because
the code changes were hidden in the patches/ directory, which you originally
said was simply backported code from 2.6.19 (not backported-and-hacked-on!).
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home