>> The hypercalls can be called with various parameters number.
>> Both x86_64 and i386 are supported.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dor Laor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>> +static inline int
>> +__hypercall6(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, unsigned long p2,
>> + unsigned long p3, unsigned long p4
>> +static inline int
>> +__hypercall2(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, unsigned long p2)
>> +{
>> +int ret;
>> +asm (" call hypercall_addr\n"
>[...]
>> +return ret;
>
>Hello Dor,
>
>Linux system calls return long. I think hypercalls should behave in a
>similar
>manner and return long
>> +asm (" call hypercall_addr\n"
>
>Hi Dor,
>
>This cannot work, because hypercall_addr is currently not defined in
>todays
>kvm.git:
The definition is inside kvm_pv.c which was in the next patchset, I'll
join them in the next series. [Although Anthony L. has a different
method that
might c
On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 16:57 -0700, Dor Laor wrote:
> The hypercalls can be called with various parameters number.
> Both x86_64 and i386 are supported.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dor Laor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> +static inline int
> +__hypercall6(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, unsigned long p2,
>
Am Samstag, 25. August 2007 schrieb Dor Laor:
> +static inline int
> +__hypercall2(unsigned int nr, unsigned long p1, unsigned long p2)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + asm (" call hypercall_addr\n"
[...]
> + return ret;
Hello Dor,
Linux system calls return long. I think hypercalls should behave
Am Samstag, 25. August 2007 schrieb Dor Laor:
> + asm (" call hypercall_addr\n"
Hi Dor,
This cannot work, because hypercall_addr is currently not defined in todays
kvm.git:
# grep -R hypercall_addr *
drivers/kvm/kvm.h:unsigned char *hypercall_addr);
#
IIRC there was a defin
Dor Laor wrote:
> The hypercalls can be called with various parameters number.
> Both x86_64 and i386 are supported.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dor Laor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> include/asm-i386/hypercall.h | 142
>
> include/asm-x86_64/hypercall.h | 105 +++
