Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH, RFC 0/5] various small improvements and cleanup

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 22.12.10 at 14:25, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yes, these all look fine to me. Actually I'm not sure whether we really need
> a general-purpose sort (patch 1/5). But I suppose we could use it in places
> like extable.c, so we might as well have it.

That's where it gets used (in patch 2).

Jan

> On 22/12/2010 12:04, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> This patch set is only loosely connected (with the exception of the first
>> two patches and some ordering dependencies to apply cleanly), and is
>> known to apply only to c/s 22467. I'm posting in the hope to get
>> eventual review comments in order to then possibly do a re-submission
>> once the large set of changes currently pending in the staging tree
>> passed regression testing.
>> 
>> Patch 1/5: make sort() generally available
>> Patch 2/5: x86-64: use PC-relative exception table entries
>> Patch 3/5: x86: link time .data section adjustments
>> Patch 4/5: x86: avoid unlikely taken forward branches
>> Patch 5/5: use bool_t for various boolean variables
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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