From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: State of Xen in upstream Linux / pv_ops dom0 Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:20:41 -0700 Message-ID: <48B41F49.3010705@goop.org> References: <48910C99.10606@goop.org> <20080812111401.GG3771@edu.joroinen.fi> <48A1B936.6090806@goop.org> <20080826083016.GD13941@edu.joroinen.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080826083016.GD13941@edu.joroinen.fi> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Pasi_K=E4rkk=E4inen?= Cc: Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Pasi K=E4rkk=E4inen wrote: > Yep. > > I noticed some dom0 patches here: > http://xenbits.xensource.com/paravirt_ops/patches.hg/rev/e11831de288c > > Is there pv_ops dom0 hg-tree already set up somewhere?=20 > =20 That's it - I'm working in a patch queue. But this work is still very preliminary (haven't actually booted it as a dom0 kernel, though those patches don't break domU or native). J