RE: Réf. : RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Focus on non-VTI?

["Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>]

I responded with a clarification to Fred on this off-list...

 

I am fully supportive of VTI and agree that both VTI and non-VTI need to

be supported in all development.  I was only referring to a focus for

the next few weeks until Xen 3.0 is released.  For example, if there

were some major merging required for VTI that might cause instability,

I would recommend delaying that until post-3.0.  We would like to

have real Xen/ia64 users (not just developers) and many/most will

not have access to VTI until Montecito is broadly available in OEM

servers.

 

P.S. Jean-Paul, for some reason all of your email is cc'ed to xen-ia64-devel-bounces,

which gets bounced to the list administrator (me).  Is this address

in your alias for xen-ia64-devel?

---

From: jean-paul.pigache@xxxxxxxx [mailto:jean-paul.pigache@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:42 AM
To: Yang, Fred
Cc: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins); xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Réf. : RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Focus on non-VTI?

I am supporting what Fred is saying.
Xen-VTI is important as it will allow to run unmodified operating systems.
We need to have in mind both VTI and non-VTI modes in every new development.
Jean-Paul

"Yang, Fred" <fred.yang@xxxxxxxxx> Envoyé par : xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 26/10/2005 07:33

Pour :        "Magenheimer, Dan \(HP Labs Fort Collins\)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>, <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>         cc :                 Objet :        RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Focus on non-VTI?

Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:
> Using history as a guide (not HP internal information...
> I don't have any), it usually takes a few months from
> chip release to volume production of systems based on
> the chip.  If this is true, it is likely to be at least
> 9-12 months until most Itanium users have access to
> VTI systems.  Thus, we should probably focus on getting
> non-VTI features stable for Xen/ia64 3.0.
Dan,

VTI is live and healthy.  Members in this community are eager to build
product base on Xen/VTI,  members want to make sure they have Xen ready
for their products.  This is how the community contribute into this
effort.

We should revisit Xen/ia64 current implementation to make sure the
community members can benefit from it, example as VHPT for SMP support
and PMT for grant table described in the other threads.

-Fred

_______________________________________________
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