From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vincent Hanquez Subject: Re: linux/arch/xen/i386 or linux/arch/i386/xen Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 22:31:41 +0200 Message-ID: <20050518203141.GE24549@snarc.org> References: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD542CE25@cacexc12.americas.cpqcorp.net> <20050518164748.GR27549@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <20050518190045.GB24549@snarc.org> <428B9BF3.70408@vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <428B9BF3.70408@vmware.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Zachary Amsden Cc: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" , Chris Wright , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Mark Williamson List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 12:48:03PM -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote: > I see, you would like domain zero to support other subarchs? > > I guarantee you it is not going to be voyager! There should be no issue > for user domains, but could domain zero could potentially need to know > things about the hardware subarch, say for some large NUMA systems? I think we don't want to support the voyager subarch, but maybe the bigsmp and es7000. -- Vincent Hanquez