On 03/18/2016 05:48 AM, Fu Wei wrote:
Hi Jan,
On 18 March 2016 at 16:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 18.03.16 at 08:41, wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
@@ -163,6 +163,36 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void
Hi Jan,
On 18 March 2016 at 16:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 18.03.16 at 08:41, wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
>> @@ -163,6 +163,36 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt,
>> int node,
>> }
>>> On 18.03.16 at 08:41, wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,36 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt,
> int node,
> }
> }
>
> +static bool __init check_xsm_signature(const void *fdt, int node,
> +
From: Fu Wei
This patch add a check_xsm_signature static function for detecting XSM
from the second unknown module.
If xen can't get the kind of module from compatible, we guess the kind of
these first two unknown respectively:
(1) The first unknown must be kernel;