* Gerd Hoffmann ([email protected]) wrote: > I fully agree. Attached below is a patch (against xen unstable > mercurial tree) which does exactly that ;) Thanks Gerd, I thought you had been working on that. Was the concern with vaddr vs. paddr worked out? thanks, -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- From: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]>
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- References:
- [RFC PATCH 00/35] Xen i386 paravirtualization support
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- From: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]>
- [RFC PATCH 00/35] Xen i386 paravirtualization support
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] DS1337 RTC subsystem driver
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH RT 0/2] futex priority based wakeup
- Previous by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 07/35] Make LOAD_OFFSET defined by subarch
- Index(es):
 |