Re: Hypercall number assignment convension (was Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH]: kexec: framework and i386)

[Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:32:09AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:

> The list of __HYPERVISOR_* defines in public/xen.h in the main xen 
> repository is the canonical place. For hypercalls in our tree, simply 
> grabbing the next number in sequence usually makes sense. I'm not sure 
> whether having structure to the hypercall numbers makes sense (e.g., a 
> range for arch-specific usage) -- if so then maybe allocating from 64 
> upwards would make sense.

Won't having discontigous regions of hcalls break the NR_hypercall
masking check?

Cheers,
Muli



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