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

Re: [Xen-devel] confusion over vcpumask in mmuext_op

To: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: John Levon <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 14:32:00 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 06:30:17 -0800
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 02:41:47AM +0000, Mark Williamson wrote:

> Linux's drivers/xen/Kconfig defines:
> if XEN
> config XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION
>       hex
>       default 0x00030203

Ah thanks. I must admit to being a bit confused though. If
xen-unstable's sparse tree isn't using the latest interface, what is?
Just us ? :)

john

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Xen-devel] confusion over vcpumask in mmuext_op
  - From: Keir Fraser

References:
- [Xen-devel] confusion over vcpumask in mmuext_op
  - From: John Levon
- Re: [Xen-devel] confusion over vcpumask in mmuext_op
  - From: Mark Williamson

Prev by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_HIGHPTE ???
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] mkelf32: Correct sh_link
Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] confusion over vcpumask in mmuext_op
Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] confusion over vcpumask in mmuext_op
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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