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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xsm_remove_from_physmap is (so far) only defined for X86 architecture, not for ARM


  • To: Lars Rasmusson <lra@xxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:36:33 +0000
  • Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel De Graaf <dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:36:56 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
  • Thread-index: Ac3wGdC1QZqofTyPg0Wm3lHu9auZcg==
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xsm_remove_from_physmap is (so far) only defined for X86 architecture, not for ARM

On 11/01/2013 16:24, "Lars Rasmusson" <lra@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>> On 11/01/2013 13:32, "lra@xxxxxxx" <lra@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> From: Lars Rasmusson <Lars.Rasmusson@xxxxxxx>
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Lars Rasmusson <Lars.Rasmusson@xxxxxxx>
>> 
>> If this is a build fix after my checkins this morning then:
>> Acked-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Yes, the XEN_TARGET_ARCH=arm32 make  breaks when compiling memory.c
> 
> In xen/include/xsm/dummy.h where many of the functions are used, some are
> declared only for X86, so I picked the same #ifdef CONFIG_X86
> as the header file uses.
> 
> As Ian said, it's not pretty, but since ARM doesn't have xsm (yet?) I think
> adding a dummy xsm_remove_from_physmap for arm also is ugly.
> 
> Is there some other way to write memory.c so that it doesn't need
> xsm_remove...?  (I mean, it does't need xsm_add....)

The XSM infrastructure is not architecture dependent. It's probably a
mistake that xsm_remove_from_physmap() is ifdef CONFIG_X86.

 -- Keir



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


 


Rackspace

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