On Fri, 2015-11-13 at 18:10 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > I agree with your point (I thought about it myself) but the current > assembly scheme for hypercalls doesn't work well with that. I would have > to introduce, and maintain going forward, two special hypercall > implementations in assembly, one for arm and another for arm64, just to > set interface_version. I don't think it is worth it; I prefer to have to > maintain the explicit interface_version setting at the call sites (that > today is just one).
You could give the bare assembly stub a different name (append _core or _raw or something) and make HYPERVISOR_platform_op a C wrapper for it which DTRT. Ian. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
