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-ppc-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: consolidated xencomm

To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: consolidated xencomm
From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 15:58:00 -0600
Cc: xen-ppc-devel <xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:58:26 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1163700499.5529.9.camel@lappy>
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: <E1Gk8pJ-0007ef-Tr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1163692542.26011.14.camel@basalt> <1163700499.5529.9.camel@lappy>
Reply-to: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 11:08 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 09:55 -0600, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > 
> > I think I'm missing something. Why did IA64 fork xencomm?
> > 
> > I distinctly remember having conversations about sharing the code, which
> > is obviously the right thing to do.
> 
>    Because Tristan believed the resulting amount of shared code would
> actually be very small (1 file) and we wanted to get his work into the
> tree before he left Bull.  We can still work to share as much as
> possible even with the code split.  Thanks,

This is the first I've heard of that conclusion.

I was working with Tristan to share the code, and the last time we spoke
(in Sep) we were discussing how "mini" descriptors may still be needed
(on all xencomm architectures!) because of Linux modules.

-- 
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center


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