From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: don't use xmalloc_array() for allocation of the (per-CPU) IDTs Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:36:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20111013183631.GJ15499@phenom.oracle.com> References: <4E96B593020000780005B0CE@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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" , Jan Beulich List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 09:15:41AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: > On 13/10/2011 08:55, "Jan Beulich" wrote: > > >>>> On 13.10.11 at 09:50, Keir Fraser wrote: > >> Finally, I'm not sure about more x86-64 code movement: I'd like to kill > >> x86-32 entirely really. > > > > I know, but you got pushed back each time you tried... > > I think we're stuck with it for 4.2. Will try again when we open development > for 4.3. The argument last time was the low-powered Atoms, used in low-end > netbooks; but there's no evidence that anyone is using Xen on such > platforms. I can't imagine it would be very worthwhile. I've actually been using Xen 4.1.1 on them. But the Atom I've is 64-bit capable.