From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=E9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: making the PVH 64bit ABI as stableo
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 18:16:13 +0200
Message-ID: <5571CB4D.5010403@citrix.com>
References: <556DC799.5040300@citrix.com>
	<556DEB9A020000780008079A@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1506021648160.19838@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<556DE352.3030703@citrix.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1506031058090.19838@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<556F0A410200007800080E4B@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=59130488e=roger.pau@citrix.com>)
	id 1Z0uI9-0004WF-HQ
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:16:21 +0000
In-Reply-To: <556F0A410200007800080E4B@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Elena Ufimtseva <elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com>, Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

El 03/06/15 a les 14.08, Jan Beulich ha escrit:
>>>> On 03.06.15 at 12:02, <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2 Jun 2015, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> With my x86 maintainer hat on, the following is an absolute minimum set
>>> of prerequisite for PVH.
>>>
>>> * 32bit support
>>
>> Could you please explain why 32bit is important to get PVH out of tech
>> preview? I don't see 32 bit OSes as an important use case. Maybe there
>> is more behind it that I cannot see.
> 
> The primary reason was named before: 32-bit support will likely
> end up changing the way 64-bit guests get launched.

I can work on the new boot ABI, even if it's just a design document now,
but the actual implementation needs to be done on top of the 32-bit
support series.

Boris, do you think you could send an early RFC of your 32-bit support
series in a couple of weeks at most?

Roger.