Source-Changes-D archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Weak x86 aliases
John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost> writes:
> On Dec 28, 11:52pm, "Mathew, Cherry G." wrote:
> } On December 28, 2018 9:54:11 PM GMT+05:30, John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost> wrote:
> } >On Dec 28, 7:36pm, "Cherry G.Mathew" wrote:
> } >} Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> writes:
> } >} > Le 28/12/2018 �� 14:57, Cherry G.Mathew a ��crit :
> } >} >> Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> writes:
> } >} >>>> Introduce a weak alias method of exporting different
> } >implementations
> } >} >>>> of the same API.
> } >} >>>
> } >} >>> Please revert or fix this change.
> } >} >>
> } >} >> I'm not sure what the fix is - do you have a suggestion ?
> } >} >
> } >} > either re-apply it without using weak symbols, or change the
> } >modloader
> } >} > to accept weak symbols
> } >}
> } >} I don't like the imperative in your tone. NVMM is the user of
> } >modloader,
> } >} not PVHVM. So if you feel like your usecase needs fixing, I'd say
> } >it's
> } >} your problem - or don't use modules, but see below.
> } >
> } > I suspect there's a language issue here due to people using
> } >English as a second language. However, I don't see an imperative
> } >(command) here. You asked for suggestions on how to fix a problem.
> } >He answered your question with a couple of suggestions. That's
> } >all.
> } >
> } > Also, I would argue that the kernel uses modloader, not the
> } >module. In any event, as mentioned, it is your change that broke
> } >things...
> }
> } Based on Jason's reply I suspect I've broken modules on Xen too.
> } ISTR that you did some work in this area. If you did, can you
> } comment?
>
> I mostly worked on the infrastructure to build a seperate set
> of modules for xen and xen-pae. On amd64, Xen modules didn't work
> due to missing modmap, which maxv fixed. On i386, only simple
> modules worked due to not being able to find symbols. I really
> don't know a whole lot about linkers and loaders (manipulating
> makefiles is much simpler).
>
> However, having said that, I suspect that your work with PVHVM
> (and presumably PVH after that) will make the idea of having seperate
> modules for Xen obsolete. I.e. it appears to me that we're headed
> to a world where a single kernel will work both on raw iron and
> under Xen.
>
I would like to maintain PV as is. It has advantages that the PVHVM
stuff doesn't have.
--
~cherry
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index