From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH OSSTEST v5] Add arm64 build and test jobs Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:21:53 +0100 Message-ID: <1443601313.16718.141.camel@citrix.com> References: <1443539420-5842-1-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com> <22026.44846.914005.648217@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <1443542518.16718.135.camel@citrix.com> <22026.48444.343407.252167@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <22026.48444.343407.252167@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Jackson Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 17:33 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH OSSTEST v5] Add arm64 build and test > jobs"): > > Not quite, since the arm32 and arm64 h/w is distinct. These tests won't > > run > > on any of the arm32 hardware we have and the existing armhf tests won't > > run > > on the new hwardware (for reasons I'll hopefully explain in the course > > of > > answering the next question below). > > Ah. And we are hoping to get some arm64 hardware "RSN" ? Yes indeed. > > > Also, why are there no > > > test-arm64-armhf > > > jobs ? > > > > "It's complicated". > ... > > But each new ARMv8 processor implementation involves a certain amount > > of > > per vendor code in Linux in arch/arm64 (the AArch64 AKA 64-bit port). > > That > > support is rarely (never?) also added to arch/arm (the 32-bit port). > > Hence > > it would be unusual to even find a 32-bit kernel to run on a 64-bit > > capable > > processor. > ... > > I suppose there is also a fourth possibility which is a fully 64-bit > > host > > with 32-bit guests, which is probably the most plausible and useful > > one, > > and something we ought to consider testing at some point. > > It was this latter case which I was considering. Is this per vendor > code in Linux needed for a non-dom0 Xen guest to work ? No, they should work with just the Xen guest support. > But anyway, I guess this means we can punt on this for now. Yes please. > Thanks > for the explanation. > > Ian.