Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] kexec: Reserve hypercall number

To:	Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] kexec: Reserve hypercall number
From:	Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:04:30 +0100
Delivery-date:	Wed, 30 Aug 2006 10:04:46 -0700
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20060830053306.GA14035@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcbMVltwmf65HDhJEdux/QAKle7CWA==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] kexec: Reserve hypercall number
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620



On 30/8/06 6:33 am, "Horms" <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> this patch reserves a hypercall number for kexec,
>> to ensure that it isn't a moving target.
> 
> I notice that since I sent this patch two new hypercall numbers
> have been added, __HYPERVISOR_sysctl and __HYPERVISOR_domctl,
> but this patch remains neither merged nor nacked.
> 
> Is reserving a hypercall number for kexec acceptable?

Yes, I've now done so.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel