Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.3: x86 32 bit code removed or depreciated?

[Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>; xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 12:28
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.3: x86 32 bit code removed or depreciated?
> 
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>  From: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>>  To: Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>  Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>  Sent: Wednesday, 10 July 2013, 11:34
>>>  Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen 4.3: x86 32 bit code removed or
>>   depreciated?
>>> 
>>>>>>   On 10.07.13 at 12:23, Ian Murray 
> <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>  wrote:
>>>>   I have seen in various places that x86 32 bit support would be 
> dropped for
>>>>   4.3 and the only mention in the release material is a one-liner in 
> the
>>>  "Xen
>>>>   4.3 Feature List" in the wiki
>>>> 
>>>>       * Remove 32-bit and ia64
>>>>   I know a lot of code was removed for ia64 because there are 
> comments to the
>>> 
>>>>   effect in the commit statistics, but no mention of 32-bit/x86.
>>>> 
>>>>   Has the code been actively removed, or is still there but 
> depreciated?
>>> 
>>>  I'm sorry, but why do you ask here rather than checking the sources
>>>  (xen/arch/x86/x86_32/ is gone, just to name a simple and obvious
>>>  example) or the commit log (5d1181a5 "xen: Remove x86_32 build
>>>  target." is pretty explicit I would think).
>> 
>>  Apology accepted. :)
>> 
>>  You assume that I am fully familiar with the source layout to know what is 
> missing and that I possess more than rudimentary git skills or am experienced 
> enough to know the exact search terms that would yield results. Well, I am 
> not 
> and I don't.
>> 
>>  Yes, I could have discovered this myself, but it would have taken me some 
> time to arrive at a definitive answer (as I am no expert) and I thought it 
> quicker and not too onerous on other people to ask the list; Sorry, if that 
> wasn't the case for you. You didn't have to "waste" your time 
> answering me and I am sure it took more time to back up your complaint than a 
> simple "yes" or "no", but thanks for the answer to my 
> question. I do appreciate it. Unfortunately, nobody pays me to sit and look 
> at 
> Xen source code, so I have to do it outside of my day job.
>> 
>>  Of course, I did look in the release notes which is where it *should be* 
> but IMHO those release notes look more like marketing spiel than anything 
> useful 
> technically.
> 
> I think that's a bit unfair.  The release notes page is 1/3 new
> features, 1/3 comment on the change to installing in /usr/local/ by
> default (technical) and 1/3 known issues, which are also very
> technical in nature.  Even the new features contain a lot of
> techinical links: how to switch to the old qemu if you have problems,
> how to use the new multiple USB device feature, and links to how to
> set up openvswitch on your system.

Yes, it probably was a bit unfair. Sorry. I was in a bad mood by that point and 
it was a bit off-the-cuff. ;) It's probably because a few media sites have been 
quoting it verbatim, rather actual content

I wasn't subscribed when the 32 bit announcement was made back in the day and 
only learned about it in the The Register article announcing the 4.3 release. 
Normally that means the opposite is true :) (They managed to mis-spell your 
name even).


> 
> I just added a comment about removing 32-bit x86 and ia64 code.  If
> you have other suggestions for what would be useful to include, feel
> free to suggest it.
> 
> -George
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel