Re: [Xen-devel] Vanilla Linux 64-bit paravirt guest support

[Michael Abd-El-Malek <mabdelmalek@xxxxxxx>]

On Apr 10, 2008, at 10:11 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 09:01 -0500, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > Michael Abd-El-Malek wrote:
> > > Is 64-bit domU support available anywhere at the moment?  For  
> > > example,
> > > what is the status of the git://git.et.redhat.com/xen-pvops-64.git
> > > tree?  I pulled that tree and tried building 64-bit Xen domU support
> > > (since this tree allows you to configure the kernel with that
> > > capability, unlike the vanilla Linux tree).  But compilation  
> > > failed in
> > > enlighten.c because xen_smp_ops isn't defined in x86_64.
> Try building without CONFIG_SMP, it doesn't support that yet.
Other than SMP support, does the tree represent a fully functional 64- 
bit PV domU support? Does it also allow all hypercalls?  Put another  
way: is a 64-bit PV domU from that tree less capable than a 64-bit PV  
domU from Xen's linux-2.6.18.8 tree?
> > Redhat have some patches which they're shipping in Fedora 9.  Once  
> > F9 is
> > out the door, I'm hoping they'll polish them into an upstreamable  
> > form.
> > I don't know whether that git tree represents what's in F9, or if  
> > that's
> > somewhere else; at the very least I'd expect you'd be able to pull  
> > the
> > patches out of the srpm.
> Yep, this tree:
>
>  http://git.et.redhat.com/?p=xen-pvops-64.git
>
> is the work-in-progress x86_64 tree.
>
> This tree:
>
>  http://git.et.redhat.com/?p=linux-2.6-fedora-pvops.git
>
> is what we're actually shipping for F-9. It includes the x86_64 work,
> but some other paravirt_ops patches too, most of which are queued up
> upstream.
Which tree do you recommend I use?

Thanks,
Mike

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