>>> On 26.02.15 at 17:28, <t...@xen.org> wrote: > At 16:11 +0000 on 26 Feb (1424963496), Tim Deegan wrote: >> Explicitly _not_ addressing the use of 'private' in various fields, >> since we'd previously decided not to fix that. > > BTW, ring.h is the only instance of that, so the extra diff to clear > that up too is pretty small (see below). > > Not sure what people think about that though - it might be > quite a PITA for downstream users of it, though they ought really to > be using local copies so they can update in a controlled way.
linux-2.6.18-xen.hg always having consumed them (almost) verbatim, I don't think we should break users not massaging the headers. I.e. at least make the field name conditional upon using C vs C++. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
