Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 01/28] HYPERCALL_version_op. New hypercall mirroring XENVER_ but sane.

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:30:09AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 30.03.16 at 17:43, <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Since they're all cosmetic, if you take care of all of them, feel free
> > to stick my ack on the result.
> 
> Actually - no, please don't. While the patch is fine content wise
> then from my perspective, I'm still lacking a convincing argument
> of why this new hypercall is needed in the first place. If others
> are convinced by the argumentation between (mostly, iirc) you
> and Andrew, I'm not going to stand in the way, but I'm also not
> going to approve of the code addition without being myself
> convinced.

Damm. I pushed the patch in yesterday in 'staging'!

We can always revert them..

"Others" being other maintainers I presume?

The underlaying reason for me doing this is to expose the build-id.

It (build-id) originally was in sysctl, then folks wanted it in XENVER_.
Got it working in there as sub-ops, but Andrew last minute decided that
it should not really be there but in a new hypercall that can do
three arguments (the length) and be able to return -EPERM. A sane
one, not the cobbled up XENVER one.



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