| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-ia64-devel
Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] the xenLinux/IA64 upstream merge and Fedora.
On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 10:58 +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> I'd like to share informations and opinions to avoid duplicate works.
> Please comments.
>
> Some questions.
> - Is anyone already working on it?
> - What code base is best to begin with?
> Although the official xenLinux/IA64 tree is
> http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/ia64/linux-2.6.18-xen.hg
> Does Fedora have any forward ported tree?
This is definitely one of the tricky parts. Obviously we'll need to
submit patches against upstream Linux, but we'll likely need to leverage
the work of others for forward porting the core of the xen enabled
components. The Fedora Xen kernel module may be a reasonable target,
but there are probably lots of small architecture specific parts we can
isolate into functional chunks and clean-up for upstream in the
meantime.
> Some thoughts.
> - domU first and then dom0.
> the domu/IA64 part would be easy because MMU is fully virtualized
> on IA64.
Yes, this would also allow us to start out focused on architecture
specific parts while others solidify what the basis for dom0 looks like
on upstream.
> - Coding Style
> The current code's style should be clean up.
Definitely, although I think we've done a reasonable job matching
Linux coding style for XenLinux files, I'm sure we'll find examples to
the contrary.
> - Although xenLinux/x86 uses pv_ops, probably the machine vector
> should be considered at first. Then consider on the ia64 pv_ops.
Yes, it's been unclear to me the extent to which ia64 needs pv_ops.
We already have the xen machine vector and we may be able to expand the
machine vector to incorporate a few more things where it makes sense.
Then we need to see what pieces are left and whether it makes sense to
create an ia64 pv_ops or implement more of the binary replacement type
things we've discussed previously.
> - The kernel initialization might need to be revised.
> Especially the hypervisor detection and the initialization order.
I think all of the xenlinux code should be carefully reviewed and
re-evaluated as we try to get it upstream. This is also an opportunity
to improve the code.
> - other VMM.
> Possibly kvm/ia64 or lguest/ia64 may have their opinion
> on paravirtualization. But their code aren't opened yet.
> This might make our merge easier or more difficult.
> Anyway we'll see.
Yes, ia64 is at a bit of a disadvantage here since x86 has several
implementations of paravirtualization to help tune their pv_ops. We
should probably expect some of the interfaces to change over time as new
PV guests are added, but we should try to solicit feedback from Jes and
Xiantao as much as we can.
Thanks,
Alex
--
Alex Williamson HP Open Source & Linux Org.
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home