From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: Vanilla Linux 64-bit paravirt guest support Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:57:37 -0500 Message-ID: <47FE2AE1.4020404@goop.org> References: <47FAF285.10103@cmu.edu> <47FBE3CF.4000107@goop.org> <47FD942C.5040503@cmu.edu> <47FE1DB6.6050707@goop.org> <1207836684.16779.8.camel@muff> <3883AEC7-3636-4809-8516-8870C1B9C7C4@cmu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3883AEC7-3636-4809-8516-8870C1B9C7C4@cmu.edu> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Michael Abd-El-Malek Cc: Mark McLoughlin , xen-devel , Eduardo Habkost List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Michael Abd-El-Malek wrote: > On Apr 10, 2008, at 10:11 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: >> On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 09:01 -0500, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >>> Michael Abd-El-Malek wrote: >>>> Is 64-bit domU support available anywhere at the moment? For example, >>>> what is the status of the git://git.et.redhat.com/xen-pvops-64.git >>>> tree? I pulled that tree and tried building 64-bit Xen domU support >>>> (since this tree allows you to configure the kernel with that >>>> capability, unlike the vanilla Linux tree). But compilation failed in >>>> enlighten.c because xen_smp_ops isn't defined in x86_64. >> >> Try building without CONFIG_SMP, it doesn't support that yet. > > Other than SMP support, does the tree represent a fully functional > 64-bit PV domU support? Does it also allow all hypercalls? Put > another way: is a 64-bit PV domU from that tree less capable than a > 64-bit PV domU from Xen's linux-2.6.18.8 tree? The 32-bit domU implementation is less capable than 2.6.18-xen. For example, it does not yet support suspend/resume/migrate or ballooning, and a number of interesting features are not yet in a released kernel (pvfb). Further out I hope we'll get things like dom0 support in as well. (I'm not sure what you mean by "allow all hypercalls"; do you mean "all features"?) J