From: Horms <horms@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: kexec: framework and i386
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:06:19 +0900
Message-ID: <20060417060617.GA20303@verge.net.au>
References: <20060407074234.GA19846@verge.net.au>
	<20060412091228.GA7409@verge.net.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060412091228.GA7409@verge.net.au>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus@valinux.co.jp>

On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 06:12:30PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> 
> kexec: framework and i386

[snip]

>   * This patch was prepared against xen-unstable.hg 9514
>     As of today (9574) two new hypercalls have been added.
>     I rediffed and moved the kexec hypercall to 33. However
>     this exceedes hypercall_NR, which is currently 32. 
>     I tried increasing this, but the dom0 now crashes 
>     in entry.S on init. Even after rebuilding both xen and the kernel
>     completely from scratch after a make distclean. Help!!

Hi,

I am a bit concerned that this patch is going to start rotting if I
can't at least track the current xen-unstable.hg, or better still get it
merged.

I would really appreciate it if someone could take moments to comment on
the hypercall problem. Is adding a new hypercall, as the current patch
does, the best way? If so could someone point me to how to increase the
hypercall table size. If not, is it best to piggyback of the dom0_op
hypercall? Or is there some other prefered option?

-- 
Horms