FYI, cset 9434 (Switch the default build to make the -xen kernel, not
the -xen0 and -xenU) breaks xen/ia64 as we do not currently have a
linux-defconfig-xen_ia64. I don''t understand why such a change is
being
made so close to Xen 3.0.2. Can we make this architecture dependent?
Thanks,
Alex
--
Alex Williamson HP Linux & Open Source Lab
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On 27 Mar 2006, at 17:49, Alex Williamson wrote:> FYI, cset 9434 (Switch the default build to make the -xen kernel, > not > the -xen0 and -xenU) breaks xen/ia64 as we do not currently have a > linux-defconfig-xen_ia64. I don''t understand why such a change is > being > made so close to Xen 3.0.2. Can we make this architecture dependent?Final release and snapshot to the 3.0-testing tree won''t be until the end of this week. Please send us a suitable -xen config for ia64. -- Keir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> FYI, cset 9434 (Switch the default build to make the -xen > kernel, not the -xen0 and -xenU) breaks xen/ia64 as we do not > currently have a linux-defconfig-xen_ia64. I don''t > understand why such a change is being made so close to Xen > 3.0.2. Can we make this architecture dependent?Can you supply a suitable config? Or is it not possible to have a single kernel that works as both a dom0 and domU on current ia64? The change was discussed on xen-devel, and certainly makes sense, at least on x86. It''s not something that would be nice to make arch dep, but it could be as a hack. Ian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 18:05 +0100, Ian Pratt wrote:> > FYI, cset 9434 (Switch the default build to make the -xen > > kernel, not the -xen0 and -xenU) breaks xen/ia64 as we do not > > currently have a linux-defconfig-xen_ia64. I don''t > > understand why such a change is being made so close to Xen > > 3.0.2. Can we make this architecture dependent? > > Can you supply a suitable config? Or is it not possible to have a single > kernel that works as both a dom0 and domU on current ia64? > > The change was discussed on xen-devel, and certainly makes sense, at > least on x86. It''s not something that would be nice to make arch dep, > but it could be as a hack.I''ll work on it and either submit a Makefile hack or a suitable -xen config. I think xencons vs serial console is the main thing preventing a combined config file. Thanks, Alex -- Alex Williamson HP Linux & Open Source Lab _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> I''ll work on it and either submit a Makefile hack or a > suitable -xen config. I think xencons vs serial console is > the main thing preventing a combined config file. Thanks,Could you elaborate a bit? How is it different from x86? Thanks, Ian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 18:24 +0100, Ian Pratt wrote:> > I''ll work on it and either submit a Makefile hack or a > > suitable -xen config. I think xencons vs serial console is > > the main thing preventing a combined config file. Thanks, > > Could you elaborate a bit? How is it different from x86?Looks like I was mistaken, CONFIG_VT is the major issue. I''ll send out a patch shortly that avoids conswitchp in a similar way to x86. Serial in xen/ia64 is still pretty kludgy, but we''ll save that for another day. Thanks, Alex -- Alex Williamson HP Linux & Open Source Lab _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel