[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-changelog] [linux-2.6.18-xen] Add #ifdef ARCH_HAS_DEV_MEM to archtecture specific file_operations.

2007-07-09 Thread Hollis Blanchard
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 10:01 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: By the way, I wonder how PPC manages to build both drivers/char/mem.c and drivers/xen/char/mem.c without ARCH_HAS_DEV_MEM? The model is supposed to be that mem_fops defined by the Xen file is picked up by the generic file. If

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-changelog] [linux-2.6.18-xen] Add #ifdef ARCH_HAS_DEV_MEM to archtecture specific file_operations.

2007-07-09 Thread Keir Fraser
On 9/7/07 20:20, Hollis Blanchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By the way, I wonder how PPC manages to build both drivers/char/mem.c and drivers/xen/char/mem.c without ARCH_HAS_DEV_MEM? The model is supposed to be that mem_fops defined by the Xen file is picked up by the generic file. If

Re: [XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-changelog] [linux-2.6.18-xen] Add #ifdef ARCH_HAS_DEV_MEM to archtecture specific file_operations.

2007-07-09 Thread Jimi Xenidis
On Jul 9, 2007, at 3:41 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote: On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 20:26 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: On 9/7/07 20:20, Hollis Blanchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By the way, I wonder how PPC manages to build both drivers/char/ mem.c and drivers/xen/char/mem.c without ARCH_HAS_DEV_MEM?