This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [POWERPC/IA64] Updates required due to loader changes

To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [POWERPC/IA64] Updates required due to loader changes
From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 13:09:00 -0500
Cc: Jimi Xenidis <jimix@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:08:48 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1156355091.12949.136.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center
References: <1156341628.12949.48.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1156343769.12949.59.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1156355091.12949.136.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 18:44 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 15:36 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Since this is one of the few things which would prevent you using a
> > 3.0.2 dom0 on a 3.0.3 hypervisor I'm going to add the backwards compat
> > stuff to the dom0 builder.
> > 
> > Changes will probably needed to ia64 and powerpc but I'll get back to
> > you on that...
> I've now done this, it should come through as changesets 11244-11246.

You may not realize this, but those numbers you're using are specific to
a particular tree. Instead, please use the changeset hash, because that
refers to the same changeset no matter what tree it's in.

At any rate, it seems these patches have not been moved out of the
private staging tree, so I really can't comment on them.

> The accessor functions which abstract the elf notes vs. __xen_guest
> stuff should now be OK with both being absent on !x86 so I think the
> patches I sent earlier are still correct, but please confirm.
> Does it make sense to add a token set of ELF notes to your kernels? I
> think XEN_VERSION, GUEST_OS and GUEST_VERSION would do the job...

I don't have any objection in principle.

Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center

Xen-devel mailing list