WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] PV blk backend: Make 32bit PV guests work o

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] PV blk backend: Make 32bit PV guests work on 64bit PV Dom0
From: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:04:47 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 06:05:14 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C4B38183.24B44%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcjwseyiK1ZlJFylEd2NDAAX8io7RQAAJY3D
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][XEN] PV blk backend: Make 32bit PV guests work on 64bit PV Dom0
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.4.0.080122


On 28/7/08 14:00, "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>> Quite the opposite. By doing it in your own header files you can specify
>>> the structure names and so on exactly how you would like them to be for the
>>> particular OS concerned.
>> 
>> I'm concerned about having/keeping the API/ABI the same between all OS's and
>> not about their implementation.
> 
> The interfaces (both the API exposed by public/ headers; and the ABI they
> describe) won't change. At least not in a way that isn't backward
> compatible. Or we'd be breaking old OSes all the time!

I might add: why would placing those extra struct definitions in the public
headers make it any more or less likely that we'll break compatibility in
future? That makes no sense to me.

 -- Keir



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