WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 		  
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS:

from [Andrei Petrov] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS: something about ia64 that nobody would read :-)
From: Andrei Petrov <andrei.petrov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:02:15 -0700
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 11 May 2005 21:02:25 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD542CAEC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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>
References: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD542CAEC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i 
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 12:46:08PM -0700, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort 
Collins) wrote:
> 
> Granted, turning off SMP on Xen/x86 doesn't even compile right
> now, but that should be fixable.
> 
> So... opinions anyone?  Is keeping CONFIG_SMP (potentially) useful
> or not?

Depends on target application area, if xen will be used in appliances or
embedded systems, or laptops (think QOS, securi1y) then keeping CONFIG_SMP
(!CONFIG_SMP even) would be an advantage for the project.

--Andrei

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  RE: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS:something about ia64 that nobody would read :-), Ian Pratt
Next by Date:  RE: [Xen-devel] [RESUBMIT] [PATCH] xen, tools: pincpu use vcpu and cpumap_t, Ian Pratt
Previous by Thread:  Re: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS: something about ia64 that nobody would read :-), Christian Limpach
Next by Thread:  RE: [Xen-devel] CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS:something about ia64 that nobody would read :-), Ian Pratt
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]
 
   

Copyright , Citrix Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Legal and Privacy