This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [XenPPC] [RFC][PATCH] Isolating ACM's architecture-d

To: Tristan Gingold <Tristan.Gingold@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [XenPPC] [RFC][PATCH] Isolating ACM's architecture-dependent parts
From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:56:50 -0400
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 04:58:20 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200609261354.27412.Tristan.Gingold@xxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Tristan Gingold <Tristan.Gingold@xxxxxxxx> wrote on 09/26/2006 07:54:27 AM:

> Le Mercredi 13 Septembre 2006 18:42, Stefan Berger a écrit :
> > xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 09/13/2006 11:00:16 AM:
> > > That is where the (non-inline) ACM/multiboot functions should live; not
> > > in a header file.
> >
> > I could move them there but that would include the architecture-dependent
> > #ifdef's.
> >
> > > > What about the multiboot code. Do you think PPC will be able to also
> > > > use this part? Not that I would move it, it's more out of curiosity.
> > >
> > > Well, that ifdef will need changing. Why must it exist at all, is it
> > > some weirdness of Xen/x86-64?
> >
> > Yes, on x86-64 we need that. It would be possible to define MACROs for
> > x86-64 and i386 so the code could look the same. It will be necessary to
> > do either that for ia64 and ppc as well, or we just leave the #ifdef's in
> > the ACM code.
> Hi,
> sorry for the late reply, I am just back from holidays.
> It seems you patch has not yet been merged.  Is there any reason ?
> I'd like to see it in the repository, it will help me to enable ACM on ia64.

We wanted to wait for the 3.0.3 close and submit them soon after that.

> > Either way is fine by me. From what I could find, there's at
> > least grub available for ia64, so chances that ia64 can also use the
> > multiboot code are high.
> Yes I am porting grub to ia64.  I am not sure it could use multiboot as is



> because multiboot is not 64 bits ready.

Xen-devel mailing list