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

[Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

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 

:-)

  Stefan

> because multiboot is not 64 bits ready.



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