Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
> Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> On 03/23/10 13:45, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> I don't think we can pull in:
>>>
>>> - extboot
>>> - ia64
>>> - in-kernel pit[1]
>>> - associated command line options
>>> - device passthrough
>>>
>>> The question is, if we dropped those things, would people actually
>>> use qemu.git instead of qemu-kvm.git. If the answer is "no", what
>>> set of things do we need in order for people to focus on qemu.git
>>> instead of qemu-kvm.git.
>> I am not sure if anyone is still actively working on ia64. According
>> to the qemu-kvm.git logs, there hasn't been any real ia64 changes to
>> the code since my last commit in June of last year and then a couple
>> of minor configure bits.
>>
>> IMHO we can just let it rot - not sure if Xiantao is still interested?
> For ia64 part, maybe we can keep the current qemu-kvm.git for the users. And it is not a must to push it into Qemu upstream. 
> Xiantao
> 

Does it still build & work? Does someone test it at least infrequently?
Or are there users?

There were a few changes recently due to cleanups and/or switches to
upstream code. There will be more in the future. And at some point heavy
work will be needed when there are no more qemu-kvm* files. That could
be a point ia64 breaks forever unless someone jumps in.

BTW, I'm also carrying ia64 bits in kvm-kmod. I never compiled them
(except for the "make headers_install" which throws tons of warnings at
me), I'm just keeping them for now to enforce architecture separation in
case someone once wishes to add another arch to this wrapper.

Jan