Re: [Xen-devel] Re: xen-kernel and EDD

[Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>]

You can ignore the bit of the patch that touches BOOT_TRAMPOLINE in
include/asm-x86/config.h. You just need to apply the parts of the patch that
affect arch/x86/boot/trampoline.S.

 K.


On 24/08/2011 10:36, "BobZhang" <2004.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi  Keir , rhel5.7s‘ xen version is : kernel-2.6.18-268.el5.src.rpm
> xen-3.0.3-132.el5.src.rpm thanks very much for your sustained help on this
> issue. Do you mean this link ?
> http://xenbits.xensource.com/hg/xen-unstable.hg/rev/3b481059a54dfrom your
> xen.org , I find http://xenbits.xen.org/hg/there are many branches and one
> unstable hg。 I have a doubt , from this link , I can see this last update date
> is 2007 year. and in config.h BOOT_TRAMPOLINE was still 0x94000 . It seems
> that 5 days ago : BOOT_TRAMPOLINE has just been set 0x7c000 (certainly, I we
> all think 0x7c000 is very very reasonable,this should be the most right value)
> . I want to confirm : Do you  think BOOT_TRAMPOLINE ’s value is independent on
> any other later code ?  I prefer this idea to be right. it seems that your
> comments page code that just make BOOT_TRAMPOLINE definition independent. if
> yes , I will try your comments plus BOOT_TRAMPOLINE 0X7C000 anway , I will try
> both 0x94000 and 0x7c000(this will be widely suitable for all platform ).
> 
> View this message in context: Re: xen-kernel and EDD
> <http://xen.1045712.n5.nabble.com/xen-kernel-and-EDD-tp4710939p4729847.html>
> Sent from the Xen - Dev mailing list archive
> <http://xen.1045712.n5.nabble.com/Xen-Dev-f2473738.html>  at Nabble.com.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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