Re: [Xen-merge] First 6 patches

[Vincent Hanquez <vincent.hanquez@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 11:58:14PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_XEN
> +     if ((regs->xcs & 2) != 2)
> +#else
>       if ((regs->xcs & 3) != 3)
> +#endif
> 
> That change is all over the place.  That should be a macro value that's
> defined by the arch.  The only reason I didn't do that in the other
> patch I submitted is I couldn't think of a good name.  KERNEL_CS_PL?
> Something...at any rate, change should only be in header.  Also, I
> missed why the breakout of sigframe.h?  They are identical?  It's an
> unncessary change.

a user_mode(regs) macro is already is 2.6.13-rc4.
you can backport it (I submitted it for 2.6.12, so not really a backport),
that would not be too much problem when applying a 2.6.13 patch.

-- 
Vincent Hanquez

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