From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: The virtuailization patches break Voyager. Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 19:15:10 +0200 Message-ID: <20070428171510.GA29316@bingen.suse.de> References: <4632FD3E.401@goop.org> <200704281134.53160.ak@suse.de> <1177776315.3688.43.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1177776315.3688.43.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: James Bottomley Cc: virtualization@lists.osdl.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org > It's getting embarrassing to find myself responsible for practically > everything in this debate people regard as strange ... Didn't want to say it was strange, just that it's not as easy on x86 and unclear if feasible there. Yes I would like to have PAE and non PAE in a single kernel too - with my distro hat on having a single kernel binary for everybody would be great - but i just don't know how to do it nicely. -Andi