From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: 32bit xen and "claim"
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <e47d14a7-65e2-4e0e-aec9-3cc4379aa272@default>
References: <620abc58-07b9-4102-b883-0bfcd8e78471@default>
	<20121101204622.GA66969@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <20121101204622.GA66969@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
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: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: "Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

> From: Tim Deegan [mailto:tim@xen.org]
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] 32bit xen and "claim"
> 
> At 13:34 -0700 on 01 Nov (1351776880), Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > With the plan to obsolete the x86 32-bit hypervisor at 4.3,
> > when prototyping the "claim" hypercall/subop, can I assume
> > that the CONFIG_X86 code in the hypervisor and, specifically
> > any separation of the concepts of xen_heap from dom_heap,
> > can be ignored?
> >
> > Or will the ARM version of the hypervisor be requiring
> > a similar separation of xen_heap vs dom_heap?
> 
> Yes, 32-bit ARM has this separation.

Hmmm... looking at page_alloc.c... does ARM overload CONFIG_X86
to mean CONFIG-32-bitness then?  Seems dangerous given that
various random chunks of CONFIG_X86 may be disappearing.