Re: [PATCH] x86-64: fix HYPERVISOR_update_descriptor()

[Jan Beulich]

>>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> 12.03.09 11:54 >>>
>* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h |    2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> 
>> --- linux-2.6.29-rc7/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h	2009-03-11 17:52:10.000000000 +0100
>> +++ 2.6.29-rc7-x86_64-xen-update-descr/arch/x86/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h	2009-02-13 11:41:39.000000000 +0100
>> @@ -296,6 +296,8 @@ HYPERVISOR_get_debugreg(int reg)
>>  static inline int
>>  HYPERVISOR_update_descriptor(u64 ma, u64 desc)
>>  {
>> +	if (sizeof(u64) == sizeof(long))
>> +		return _hypercall2(int, update_descriptor, ma, desc);
>>  	return _hypercall4(int, update_descriptor, ma, ma>>32, desc, desc>>32);
>
>missing changelog and Impact line.

I'm confused: What point is there to add a textual description that matches
the subject? And where is the need for an impact line documented (clearly
neither SubmitChecklist no SubmittingPatches have any occurrence of the
word impact), i.e. what are the valid values to chose from?

Jan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/