| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-ia64-devel
Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] Re: xen-ia64-mm
Hi Horms, Dan
Sorry, I accidentally deleted the first line.
My message is intended to Horms (not, Dan)
--
Yoshi. Oguuchi wrote:
>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
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home