On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 14:05 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
quoted text
> > The thing is others and I (and you) are working on getting paravirt_ops
> > working for x86_64.  There's a lot of overlap between i386 and x86_64.
> > Right now the i386 is ahead of x86_64 and the code seems to be put more
> > in the arch/i386 arch.  So now we are going to introduce a
> > new ../../i386 hack to get to a shared paravirt_shared.c(?).  Or do we
> 
> What would you like exactly to share?  

I'm still working on that. Others have pressured us into consolidating
as much usable code for i386 into x86_64.  This may turn out not to be
too feasible anyway.

quoted text
> 
> > just continue on keeping the x86_64 as a separate entity, with a lot of
> > duplicate code?
> 
> When it makes sense to share the code it can be shared. That is already
> done today. But the existing Makefile mechanisms work fine for that.
> 
> Making sense: 
> - There is actually a lot of shared code
> - The supported hardware is the same (remember x86-64 is only for 
> modern x86 hardware, while i386 has a much longer legacy) 
> - No ifdefs

Thanks, I'll keep this in mind.

-- Steve


-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/