>>> On 02.08.16 at 15:39, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 02/08/16 14:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 02.08.16 at 15:25, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> On 02/08/16 13:52, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>>> On 18.07.16 at 11:51, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S >>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/compat/entry.S >>>>> @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ ENTRY(compat_hypercall_table) >>>>> .quad compat_update_va_mapping_otherdomain >>>>> .quad compat_iret >>>>> .quad compat_vcpu_op >>>>> - .quad compat_ni_hypercall /* 25 */ >>>>> + .quad do_set_segment_base /* 25 */ >>>> This part will (I suppose) be deleted by a later change. >>> When moved into C, it will be hidden behind the macros used to construct >>> both table values at once. >> And compat_set_segment_base could then just be #define-d to NULL. > > The entire purpose of making this change is so we don't end up with NULL > in one half a pair of function pointers, and have to extend the runtime > logic to check different pointers.
Well, okay then - feel free to add by ack. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
