Re: RFC: making the PVH 64bit ABI as stableo

[Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>]

On 06/05/2015 12:16 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> 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?

That's highly unlikely. For one, I am still unable to boot MP guests. In 
addition, it is all held together by rubber bands and matchsticks so 
calling it an RFC would be an insult to RFCs. (for example, I apparently 
broke HVM somewhere along the way).


-boris