From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: making the PVH 64bit ABI as stableo
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 17:29:21 +0100
Message-ID: <1433521761.7108.353.camel@citrix.com>
References: <556DC799.5040300@citrix.com>
	<556DEB9A020000780008079A@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1506021648160.19838@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<556DE405.30101@oracle.com> <1433322182.7108.18.camel@citrix.com>
	<556F02BA.2060000@oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=591267e2d=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>)
	id 1Z0uUq-0006OH-2X
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:29:28 +0000
In-Reply-To: <556F02BA.2060000@oracle.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Elena Ufimtseva <elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com>, Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Roger Pau =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, 2015-06-03 at 09:35 -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > What I'm hearing from the x86 maintainers is that this is actually a
> > high priority and not a "nice to have cleanup".
> >
> >> I picked 32-bit support, Elena is looking into AMD
> > With the TODOs + these 2 being the things which the x86 maintainers have
> > highlighted in this thread as being most critical for marking the ABI as
> > stable (or at least moving experimental->tech preview) let me ask
> > explicotly:
> >
> >          What are the current time frames on these two items?
> 
> For 32-bit support, just to get it to work in the within current 
> framework I think can be done for 4.7 release (which is late this year 
> IIRC).
> 
> I can't tell you how much it will take to make it a part of a "unified" 
> 32/64-bit guest launching as I haven't looked at this at all yet.

Thanks. What about AMD support then? Elena?

Ian.