| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-ia64-devel
Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] Re: xen-ia64-mm
As Fred and Dan already pointed out,
we (IPF/Xen community) had no intention of
creating a permanent mm-like tree.
Rather, while we are at p2m/vp tasks,
we decided to temporarily use Intel owned tree
(xen-ia64-unstable-Intel) as a staging tree.
When we merge upstream p2m/vp patches into upstream xen-ia64-unstable,
I think your expertise for code maintenance would be really helpful.
Sorry for confusion if I and Yamahata-san didn't communicate with you
clearly.
Thanks,
Yoshi Oguchi
--
Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:
>Hi Fred --
>
>The primary reason for having a separate tree is so that
>multiple community members can contribute to the domain0
>P==M to VP+DMA conversion without breaking the
>xen-ia64-unstable.hg tree.
>
>xen-ia64-unstable should always work for bringing up
>domain0 and domU (with VBD). For a while, it is likely
>that the new -mm tree may not even boot domain0 and
>it may be several weeks before domU works.
>
>As soon as -mm boots dom0/domU/VBD as well as it does
>today (and preferably networking too), those changes
>should be merged into xen-ia64-unstable.
>
>Thanks,
>Dan
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Yang, Fred [mailto:fred.yang@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 8:38 AM
>> To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Magenheimer, Dan (HP
>> Labs Fort Collins); Isaku Yamahata; Horms
>> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Re: xen-ia64-mm
>>
>> Horms,
>>
>> All the development should push to xen-unstable-ia64.hg.
>> xen-ia64--unstable-Intel.hg tree absolving designs that may
>> be different
>> from xen-ia64-unstable tree. I am coordinating this tree.
>> There is no
>> need to create a new tree.
>>
>> After Xen Summit, community developers are developing code base on
>> committed schedule cooperatively and come out solid SMP host and guest
>> support infrastructure in the next couple months.
>> Xen-ia64-unstabl-Intel.hg will absolve these code. Community welcome
>> more contributors.
>>
>> -Fred
>>
>> >
>> > I understand from my colleague Yamahata-san that one of the
>> ideas that
>> > came out of the Xen Summit (which unfortunately I was not able to
>> > attend) was a proposal for an mm-like tree for ia64-xen. A tree that
>> > could stand between the bleeding-edge development and breakage, such
>> > as the VP+DMA work, and the current xen-ia64-unstable.hg and
>> > xen-unstable.hg trees.
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
>Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home