Re: [Xen-devel] grant tables and HVM+PV

To:	John Levon <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] grant tables and HVM+PV
From:	Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:45:17 +0000
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:46:41 -0700
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20080328170730.GB21681@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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:	AciQ+3vnuoWgNPzuEdyMEAAX8io7RQ==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] grant tables and HVM+PV
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/11.4.0.080122

On 28/3/08 17:07, "John Levon" <levon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Most of the mapping calls wouldn't work at all.
> 
> OK. I think we were effectively ending up with a call that did nothing
> but did it quietly and now we're getting back (the correct) ENOSYS.
> Clearly our bug but it wasn't quite obvious what was supposed to work.
> 
>> Query_size() could probably be simply given a stub implementation for
>> HVM that returns all is good.
> 
> It already is, I think?

Sorry, typo. I meant setup_table(). And actually I think we can just let
that one through just as we already do for query_size().

I'll make that fix and put it in the 3.2 and 3.1 branches.

 -- Keir

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