On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 08:09:13PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 12/02/16 18:05, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
> Building the hypervisor with buildid and making it available via
> hypercall really should be split into two different patches, especially
> given the complexity in each.
OK, will do.
.. snip..
> > +/* Return value is the number of bytes written, or XEN_Exx on error.
> > + * Calling with empty parameter returns the size of build_id. */
> > +#define XENVER_build_id 10
> > +struct xen_build_id {
> > + uint32_t len; /* IN: size of buf[]. */
> > +#if defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L
> > + unsigned char buf[];
> > +#elif defined(__GNUC__)
> > + unsigned char buf[1]; /* OUT: Variable length buffer with
> > build_id. */
> > +#endif
> > +};
> > +typedef struct xen_build_id xen_build_id_t;
>
> I am still against trying to perpetuate this broken interface. Variable
> length structures are a pain for everyone to use. How about introducing
> a brand new hypercall with a separate length and data parameters?
As in subop to sysctl? I am fine with that (which is what I think was
in the first iteration of this patch had). Or it could go under the
XSPLICE subops :-)
Preferences?
>
> ~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
