From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Subject: Re: Genapic
Date: 25 May 2005 17:26:34 +0200
Message-ID: <20050525152634.GD86087@muc.de>
References: <EF8D308BE33AF54D8934DF26520252D301D9EFDE@USTR-EXCH5.na.uis.unisys.com>
	<26b3839037396bdeb5cfef7a49efb6f5@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 17:26:34 +0200
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <26b3839037396bdeb5cfef7a49efb6f5@cl.cam.ac.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Natasha Jarymowycz <natasha@us.ibm.com>, "Subrahmanian, Raj" <raj.subrahmanian@unisys.com>, "Davis,
	Jason" <jason.davis@unisys.com>, "Vessey,
	Bruce A" <Bruce.Vessey@unisys.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 09:22:47PM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> 
> On 24 May 2005, at 20:58, Puthiyaparambil, Aravindh wrote:
> 
> >I am fine with going down the x86_64 genapic route for Xen. The only
> >thing is that I know that IRQ overrides are not present in the x86_64
> >genapic. So that might have to be brought over for the ES7000.
> >
> >I would like to start working on bringing the x86_64 code over. Will
> >this clash with anyone else?
> 
> I'm about halfway through bringing i386 platform code over. I'm working 
> on smp bootup and cpumask_t right now, but genapic is next and should 
> be quite simple. I'd rather take the more flexible i386 code in the 
> first instance (which will immediately support es7000, for example) and 

It is actually not more flexible at all for the dynamic case.

With a static compile you have some more choices, should you really
want to support the Numasaurus (aka NUMAQ) or SGI Visual Workstation
(kind of a SGI O2 with a x86 CPU) or Voyager (NUMA 486).  Somehow I cannot 
imagine you really want that though, these are all quite old and obscure 
machines.

A lot of the cruft in the i386 layer even comes from PC98 support
(which was a old Japanese not quite PC x86 platform), which was later
dropped because it was unmaintained. The hooks it needed were 
never cleaned up unfortunately. 

-Andi