Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] qemu-xen: Fix PV segfault

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gerd Hoffmann writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] qemu-xen: Fix PV segfault"):
> Looked at the qemu-xen tree and the branches therein today (missed the
> original announcement as I was on vacation at that point in time).
> Ian's plan seems to be to upstream mostly bugfixes (qemu branch), not
> any xen-specific code.

I would like the xen code to go upstream as well eventually.  However
upstream have said that they're not happy with some of the things
which are essential in our tree.  For example, they are opposed to the
mapcache, which is essential for decoupling guest addresses from
qemu's address space (particularly since the guest maybe 64-bit and
qemu only 32-bit!)

> I also want to have the xen bits upstream (pv first as mentioned in the
> previous mail).  And I want to have it as runtime option, not
> compile-time option, so you don't have a separate qemu-dm binary.

If upstream change their mind then this would be nice.  But in the
absence of that, I think a different structure is called for: we
should attempt to make a separation between the parts of qemu we reuse
and the Xen stuff we add, and try to make the parts of qemu we need to
reuse but modify as small as possible.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel