From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerd Hoffmann Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] qemu-xen: Fix PV segfault Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:01:50 +0200 Message-ID: <486C876E.8040504@redhat.com> References: <4863E1F6.60909@suse.de> <18538.27111.959001.890654@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <486B3428.5000006@suse.de> <486B3E88.1020904@redhat.com> <20080702141917.GD23929@totally.trollied.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080702141917.GD23929@totally.trollied.org.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: John Levon Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian Jackson , Kevin Wolf List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org John Levon wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 10:38:32AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >> While I'm at it: There is a patch queue with at >> http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/patches/ >> >> The plan is to submit that stuff upstream, so regular qemu will have xen >> support. Right now the patch queue has only paravirt bits. It comes > > I'm confused, I thought that was the point of the qemu-xen tree Looked at the qemu-xen tree and the branches therein today (missed the original announcement as I was on vacation at that point in time). Ian's plan seems to be to upstream mostly bugfixes (qemu branch), not any xen-specific code. I also want to have the xen bits upstream (pv first as mentioned in the previous mail). And I want to have it as runtime option, not compile-time option, so you don't have a separate qemu-dm binary. cheers, Gerd -- http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/xenner/