Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] ia64: fix build (once more)

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 06.03.12 at 17:25, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 06/03/2012 15:13, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> Did we decide it was pointless me Acking IA64 fixup patches?

You said you wouldn't ack them, and then continued to nevertheless.
My preference would be to have an ack unless it's only arch/ia64/
or include/asm-ia64/ that's being touched. But for trivial changes
like the one at hand I'd otherwise simply wait a day and commit
without ack when no negative comments come back.

Jan

>> --- a/xen/arch/ia64/xen/dom0_ops.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/ia64/xen/dom0_ops.c
>> @@ -558,7 +558,7 @@ long arch_do_domctl(xen_domctl_t *op, XE
>>  
>>          switch(mec->op)
>>          {
>> -            case XEN_DOMCTL_MEM_EVENT_OP_SHARING_CONTROL:
>> +            case XEN_DOMCTL_MEM_SHARING_CONTROL:
>>              {
>>                  if (mec->u.enable) {
>>                      ret = -EINVAL; /* not implemented */
>> --- a/xen/common/tmem_xen.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/tmem_xen.c
>> @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
>>  #include <xen/domain_page.h>
>>  #include <xen/cpu.h>
>>  #include <xen/init.h>
>> -#include <asm/p2m.h>
>>  
>>  #define EXPORT /* indicates code other modules are dependent upon */
>>  
>> @@ -103,6 +102,8 @@ static inline void cli_put_page(tmem_cli
>>      ASSERT(0);
>>  }
>>  #else
>> +#include <asm/p2m.h>
>> +
>>  static inline void *cli_get_page(tmem_cli_mfn_t cmfn, unsigned long
>> *pcli_mfn,
>>                                   pfp_t **pcli_pfp, bool_t cli_write)
>>  {
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel 




_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel