WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-ia64-devel

RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] the xenLinux/IA64 upstream merge and Fedora.

To: "Alex Williamson" <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>, "Isaku Yamahata" <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] the xenLinux/IA64 upstream merge and Fedora.
From: "Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:15:50 +0800
Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:17:11 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1196787883.19310.31.camel@lappy>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20071204015840.GB12364%yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1196787883.19310.31.camel@lappy>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acg2mAq6tUJGoAr9QRy6PArh7EpQxwAhZtUw
Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel] the xenLinux/IA64 upstream merge and Fedora.
Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 10:58 +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
>> I'd like to share informations and opinions to avoid duplicate
>> works. Please comments. 
>> 
>> Some questions.
>> - Is anyone already working on it?
>> - What code base is best to begin with?
>>   Although the official xenLinux/IA64 tree is
>>   http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/ia64/linux-2.6.18-xen.hg
>>   Does Fedora have any forward ported tree?
> 
>    This is definitely one of the tricky parts.  Obviously we'll need
> to submit patches against upstream Linux, but we'll likely need to
> leverage the work of others for forward porting the core of the xen
> enabled components.  The Fedora Xen kernel module may be a reasonable
> target, but there are probably lots of small architecture specific
> parts we can isolate into functional chunks and clean-up for upstream
> in the meantime.
> 
>> Some thoughts.
>> - domU first and then dom0.
>>   the domu/IA64 part would be easy because MMU is fully virtualized
>>   on IA64.
> 
>    Yes, this would also allow us to start out focused on architecture
> specific parts while others solidify what the basis for dom0 looks
> like on upstream.
> 
>> - Coding Style
>>   The current code's style should be clean up.
> 
>    Definitely, although I think we've done a reasonable job matching
> Linux coding style for XenLinux files, I'm sure we'll find examples to
> the contrary.
> 
>> - Although xenLinux/x86 uses pv_ops, probably the machine vector
>>   should be considered at first. Then consider on the ia64 pv_ops.
> 
>    Yes, it's been unclear to me the extent to which ia64 needs pv_ops.
> We already have the xen machine vector and we may be able to expand
> the machine vector to incorporate a few more things where it makes
> sense. Then we need to see what pieces are left and whether it makes
> sense to create an ia64 pv_ops or implement more of the binary
> replacement type things we've discussed previously.
> 
>> - The kernel initialization might need to be revised.
>>   Especially the hypervisor detection and the initialization order.
> 
>    I think all of the xenlinux code should be carefully reviewed and
> re-evaluated as we try to get it upstream.  This is also an
> opportunity to improve the code.
> 
>> - other VMM.
>>   Possibly kvm/ia64 or lguest/ia64 may have their opinion
>>   on paravirtualization. But their code aren't opened yet.
>>   This might make our merge easier or more difficult.
>>   Anyway we'll see.
> 
>    Yes, ia64 is at a bit of a disadvantage here since x86 has several
> implementations of paravirtualization to help tune their pv_ops.  We
> should probably expect some of the interfaces to change over time as
> new PV guests are added, but we should try to solicit feedback from
> Jes and Xiantao as much as we can.

Worked with kvm community guys in last two months, we almost completed
kvm re-frame work. Currently, I  have almost compelted kvm/ia64 rebase
per the new framwork of kvm, although it is still need to refine by
commnunity.  So, after performing internal process, we will send out
our kvm/ia64 patches to community soon. :)
Thanks for your attention!
Xiantao 

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