Re: [patch 15/21] Xen-paravirt: Add Xen interface header files

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:10:50PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> writes:
> >
> >   
> >> Add Xen interface header files. These are taken fairly directly from
> >> the Xen tree and hence the style is not entirely in accordance with
> >> Linux guidelines. There is a tension between fitting with Linux coding
> >> rules and ease of maintenance.
> >>
> >> Define macros and inline functions for doing hypercalls into the
> >> hypervisor.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xensource.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@xensource.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@cl.cam.ac.uk>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>  include/asm-i386/hypercall.h          |  416 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  include/asm-i386/hypervisor.h         |   72 +++++
> >>     
> >
> > Are hypercall.h and hypervisor.h generic or are they Xen specific.
> > If they are Xen specific (as it appears) then are inappropriately
> > named.
> >   
> 
> Thanks for the reminder; I've been meaning to move/rename these.
> 
> >>  include/xen/interface/arch-x86_32.h   |  187 +++++++++++++
> >>     
> > Why isn't this file include-asm-i386/xen/arch-x86_32.h ?
> >   
> 
> Those files are more or less directly copied from the Xen tree, and its
> easier if they don't drift too far in name and directory structure.

Nack, we don't put per-arch crap there.  Either you'll have it in separate
places, or you clean up the utterly braindead scheme in the Xen tree
aswell.