RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] RE: how to put kernel module in xen/ipf

["Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>]

>> 3.       We haven¡¯t found a good place to contain these files. So
>> temporarily put under xen/arch/ia64.
>> Then do you have any good suggestion for the place? We¡¯d like to hear
>> that.
>
>I have been keeping a separate tree for paravirtualized xenlinux
>and non-VTI work on multiple domains has been going into that tree.
>When we have something working and can specify a patch that
>uses asm-specific headers to differentiate between common and
>arch-dep, we should submit the changes to Keir for the main
>xeno-unstable tree.  However, per a discussion on xen-devel
>a month ago, Chris Wright is working on restructuring the
>xeno-unstable.bk/xenlinux tree, so it is probably best to
>just maintain the changes separately until the restructuring
>is done.

That's reasonable.

>
>It might make sense to have a public VTI-xenlinux tree, but until
>the Xen team decides what source code management tool we will
>all be using, it is probably not a good idea to create another
>bk tree.

We don't need a public VTI-xenlinux tree. We just need a place to distribute 
hypercall/evtchn mechanism as a kernel module. Then customer can install that 
module on unmodified domain 0 to make Xen eco-system fully working. However 
currently the common code in xenlinux is tightly coupled with kernel source, 
which is not designed as a module style initially. So we have to make some 
duplication there.

>
>In any case, I don't think the changed files belong in
>xeno-xxx.bk/xen/arch/ia64 if they are not linked into
>the Xen/ia64 hypervisor.
>
>Thanks,
>Dan
>

So what about puting it into the driver directory of xenlinux, but not in 
Kbuild system of xenlinux, since it's only for unmodified domain?

Thanks,
Kevin

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel