On 2025-04-10 11:01, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.2025 15:09, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
On 4/9/25 02:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 08.04.2025 18:07, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
From: "Daniel P. Smith" <dpsm...@apertussolutions.com>

To begin moving toward allowing the hypervisor to construct more than one
domain at boot, a container is needed for a domain's build information.
Introduce a new header, <xen/asm/bootdomain.h>, that contains the initial
struct boot_domain that encapsulate the build information for a domain.

Add a kernel and ramdisk boot module reference along with a struct domain
reference to the new struct boot_domain. This allows a struct boot_domain
reference to be the only parameter necessary to pass down through the domain
construction call chain.

Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsm...@apertussolutions.com>
Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andr...@amd.com>

Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>

I have to object because the meaningless rename is going cause
significant pain in the rebase of the follow-on series for no improved
code clarity.

Sorry, then an incremental patch undoing the rename that happened (with
appropriate justification) will need proposing - the patch here has gone
in already.

Coming from a Linux background, ramdisk seemed more natural to me. But looking at hvm_start_info, the fields are called module there. And since we shouldn't tie this to the Linux naming, the more generic "module" name seemed fine to me.

Regards,
Jason

Reply via email to