From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JITWk-0001c6-Bk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:43:46 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JITWi-0001a1-PS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:43:45 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JITWi-0001Zp-HO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:43:44 -0500 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JITWh-0002ND-Qi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:43:44 -0500 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Merging KVM QEMU changes upstream Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:43:34 +0000 References: <479A222E.4@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <479A222E.4@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801251843.37551.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: kvm-devel , Anthony Liguori > Is this a reasonable merge strategy? We won't introduce regressions but > I can't guarantee these new things will work cross-architecture. I think it depends to some extent whether things will need rewriting to be made cross-architecture. In particular if this requires interface changes. This means either breaking existing guests, or having to support both interfaces. e.g. the extboot stuff seems like something that should be usable by all targets, except that the current interface looks like it's inherently x86 specific. Paul