[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "John Byrne" <john.l.byrne@xxxxxx>
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 08:05:09 +0000
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:04:16 -0800
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

>Here's the new patch.

One more comment: Any reason __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT etc. can't be
in maddr.h, where they would more logically belong?

Jan

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
  - From: Keir Fraser

References:
- Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
  - From: Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
  - From: John Byrne
- Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
  - From: John Byrne

Prev by Date: [Xen-devel] Disk configuration problem
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] x86-64 machine_to_phys vs NX bit
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.