lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] xen-block: correctly define structures in public headers
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > If Konrad and Boris agree that breaking the kernel's ABI in this way is
> > > acceptable in this specific case, I'll defer to them.
> >
> > My opinion as Xen on ARM hypervisor maintainer is that this is the right
> > thing to do in this case.
>
> Heh. If somebody can guarantee me that (by testing the right variants and
> mentioning this in the git commit) that this does not break x86, then
> I am fine.
>
> And by 'break x86' I mean that this combination works:
> 32-bit domU on 64-bit dom0
> 64-bit domU on 32-bit dom0
>
> And perhaps also the obvious:
> 64-bit domU on 64-bit dom0
> 32-bit domU on 32-bit dom0
>
> Since the xen-blkback has its own version of the structs there is no
> need to change change newer and older version of it.
>
> As long as that works I am OK sticking it in.
>
> I think from the ARM perspective it is still in 'experimental' phase
> so anything goes to make it work under ARM.

To be honest I am unhappy about this, but I don't want to clutter even
more a code path already plagued by an ifdef infestation.

Even if the ARM port is experimental, I would prefer to retain
compatibility if it was possible to do so with a couple of lines fix.
Otherwise I would rather break ABI compatibility than introducing
another half a dozen ifdefs.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-04 12:21    [W:0.079 / U:0.692 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site