 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Explicit return type for Hypercall
| To: | "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-devel] Explicit return type for Hypercall |
| From: | Tej <bewith.tej@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:08:44 +0530 |
| Delivery-date: | Thu, 09 Apr 2009 03:39:40 -0700 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6tVhtN9MAvdWXmPR6NFiY0BvhUhsx8kxNOEgpDcJQ54=; b=FEGJ6QMX0+Sxp5uGPd5iOsVcCDbgkyelZ4UH1pZkQ0bzcJsKyiXh2xhtXnXslhHETL 7Rq8p+JQjJLdsCzDImADe8fEjV9rfmnVoYJQqO9qiKhKivyelcLNkp+t8/Wr4i2+827n ntXxlUp8WqRZHcqaUcDaRGbXd6aW0dIJZV2Ug= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=lRsW8UBFPNHiNh0w47orxFOWbZeqNsuB3B4uYLBiFnaW6hpuF0GiffrjvfpCJrgOD2 yasseZGnjLcMRzia3F80AdGQ0GwpYtf0drBQa1kH3r4w0bKtlJD5KnHvTCMaVQjl+zfU ZJUQqwUqmwMXXFBqD5ZzqINdq2kweE6HUT7Q0= |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| 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 |
Hi All Some basic doubts about Hypercall return type. If kernel issue a hypercall, and there is no corresponding entry in entry.S in Hypervisor, it gives weired return type and Kernel interpret it in completely different manner. eg in GCOV case, I issued hypercall, when there is no corresponding entry in Hypervisor, it gives -38<3> as return type. and Kernel Send a message to userspace (in case of kernel module) as Kernel does not have module support, which is total misleading. 1. Is this return type is intended? 2. Why there is no interpretation of hypercall return type in kernel? Hope i am not missing any obvious thing thanks -tej _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] dom0 linux: support SBDF with "guestdev=" andremove "reassigndev=", Jan Beulich |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Xen-devel] xen pv_ops: missing tty0 console, jon.hart |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-devel] [PATCH] mapcache fixes, Stefano Stabellini |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Xen-devel] Explicit return type for Hypercall, Keir Fraser |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
