From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Aron Griffis Subject: Re: [patch-resend] take a bite out of xen-mkbuildtree-pre Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 10:43:20 -0400 Message-ID: <20060531144320.GC12106@mustard.flatmonk> References: <20060530215624.GA2425@vino.zko.hp.com> <2cef186b310801f085d7952598c9c707@cl.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2cef186b310801f085d7952598c9c707@cl.cam.ac.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Alex Williamson List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser wrote: [Wed May 31 2006, 02:49:48AM EDT] > Lots of new config variables -- are they all really needed? Not really lots... these are the new ones: XEN_UTIL ...doesn't work if XEN_IA64_DOM0_VP XEN_BALLOON XEN_CHAR XEN_SKBUFF XEN_REBOOT XEN_SMPBOOT ...don't work unless XEN_IA64_DOM0_VP We could use bigger hammers by handling them all with 2 variables, but IMHO that's just setting them up to be separated in the future when the situation changes, a new architecture is ported, etc. Do you think there's a better way? > Can ia64 not use the Xenified /dev/mem (ia64 and x86 both seem to use > direct_remap_pfn_range for various things now)? I'm a little confused how this relates to the patch... > Referring to xenia64_init.c from a generic Kconfig file is odd. > Can we pull the event-channel merge before taking this patch and avoid > the kludge to pull in the ia64-specific evtchn code? I'd like that. Alex, what do you think? Aron