Re: Xen1.2 NetBSD port snapshot available and set_gdtpatch for Xen1.2

[Christian Limpach <chris@pin.lu>]

> I agree it would be great to get this into the NetBSD tree. Christian,
> what is the maintenance model for ports in NetBSD? Are the NetBSD folks
> fairly easy to convince (I'm more familiar with the FreeBSD model)? Is
> it easy for a maintainer to become a commiter to the CVS etc.?

I have commit access to the NetBSD CVS and I can sponsor new people.

> It leaves the slight problem on how to deal with the shared files
> (hypervisor-if.h and friends). If they are not in the main NetBSD tree
> the port won't compile. If the NetbSD source contains a copy it is more
> difficult to maintain consistency. I'm more in favour of having a copy
> in the NetBSD tree as it allows compilation directly from the CVS.

yes, I've chosen to include the interface header files.  We have
autobuilders which regularly build all ports and those only work if
everything is included.

> To
> address the consistency issue maybe we should add a version number to
> hypervisor-if.h and friends and pass that down either as a separate
> hypercall (i.e., a new domain has to 'register' with Xen) or as part of
> a infrequently use hypercall (like set_trap_table). we can do the same
> for the 'device driver' interface.

Or try to keep the interface changes to a minimum and keep backwards
compatibility.  I know that's sometimes a pain but I've also found that it
leads to better interfaces if you have to be careful when adding/changing
interfaces...

> that's certainly the way to go. However, if I understand Christian
> correct, the port is against the -current (i.e. the development tree)
> which, if it is similar to the FreeBSD model, may not have
> snapshots/version numbers we can base the sparse tree against.

yes, it's against -current.  We have a kernel version number (bumped when
there are changes to exported kernel structures) but there are no snapshots
based on that version number.  I think there are weekly unversioned
snapshots on ftp.netbsd.org.

> Christian, do you have an idea how far -current has diverged from
> -stable in the parts of the tree which matter? or, i fact how often
> relavant files in -current change wrt to your changes/patches.

It's diverged quite a bit since there hasn't been a release in a long time.
I think the relevant files don't change often or rather the interfaces to
the rest of the kernel don't change often because such changes would require
changes in all ports.  Once the port is in the tree it won't get any more
out of sync than any other port.

There should be a release soon (NetBSD 2.0) but there's no momentum yet to
make it happen...

> I'm going to give the 1.2 port a spin later today or tomorrow and let
> you know how it works out.

just be sure to have an updated 1.2 with the gdt fix...

    christian



-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn