Re: [Xen-devel] Issues regarding "mem_access: Add helper API to setup ring and enable mem_access"

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 14:07 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 30/06/14 13:44, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 13:42 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >> Tamas Lengyel writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] Issues regarding "mem_access: Add 
> >> helper API to setup ring and enable mem_access""):
> >>>     > Now with this function being reintroduced, it becomes more 
> >>> complicated
> >>>     > to determine which version of the mem_access API does Xen actually
> >>>     > provide. A #define indicating mem_access API version would nicely
> >>>     > overcome this issue, or  naming xc_mem_event_enable something else.
> >>>
> >>>     Doesn't configure support checking for functions with a given 
> >>> prototype?
> >>>
> >>> It does but in a very hacky way, essentially trying to compile code where 
> >>> the
> >>> function is being called with different prototypes. We can work around it 
> >>> but a
> >>> clean solution would be preferred at some point.
> >> I agree with your criticism, TBH.  Aravindh/Ian, can we rename this
> >> function ?
> > I have no objection to some other name.
> >
> >>> This is now a rather opaque behavior of libxc. As it is not merged
> >>> into master I guess I will just submit a patch for it..
> >> Yes.  I think this would be the right approach to addressing both of
> >> these problems.  (Please send two patches, one for each.)
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ian.
> 
> There is a bug in Xen.  domctl pause and unpause hypercalls are not
> properly refcounted.  Patch on its way.

I had convinced myself by reading that they were, but Tamas'
experimental evidence obviously counters that ;-)

Ian.


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