On Mon, 2015-03-09 at 12:41 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Given the very limited change in behaviour (in fact existing callers > should work as-is) I thought that we could do without one. Also see: > http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=142563879603876&w=2.
I was also basing that on the big comment above this section which reads: /* * WARNING * This memory management API is unstable even in Xen 4.2. * It has a numer of deficiencies and we intend to replace it. * * The semantics of these functions should not be relied on to be very * coherent or stable. We will however endeavour to keep working * existing programs which use them in roughly the same way as libxl. */ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
