RE: [Xen-devel] Clustered xAPIC and Unisys ES7000 patch

["Puthiyaparambil, Aravindh" <aravindh.puthiyaparambil@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Ian,

I agree that going with the 2.6 based code is better in the long run. So
once Natasha's patch gets included in the unstable tree, I can pick it
up and apply the ES7000 patches. Does that sound like a good idea? Or
should I pick up her patches before they get applied to the unstable
tree and apply the ES7000 specific code to it and then submit it?

Aravindh

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Pratt [mailto:m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 4:09 PM
To: natasha@xxxxxxxxxx; Puthiyaparambil, Aravindh;
xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Clustered xAPIC and Unisys ES7000 patch


> I sent a second patch to the list last wednesday 
> night/thursday morning April 6.  I can resend if you need me to.

Ah, got it, thanks. 

The patch looks good to me. I propose to apply it, but Keir should have
the final say.

Aravindh: make sense to you? Going with 2.6 based code seems better in
the longer run.

Ian
 
> Some of this work conflicts with my patch (but not a 
> significant amount).  These patches are based on linux 2.4.  
> Unfortunately, the code organization changed drastically for 
> linux 2.6 and it will be a bit of work to get the Xen code up 
> to date.  However, I do believe that modeling Xen after 2.6 
> will give a much cleaner implentation -- the code for the 
> various machines which use clustered apics can go into 
> separate files instead of having so many ifdef's in the files.
> 
> I would like to propose updating all the Xen apic code.  I 
> think the first step is just to model new code, such as the 
> ES7000 support code, after 2.6 as far as code organization 
> goes.  Then the extra code from 2.4 can be stripped out.  I 
> was going to send some patches to start stripping out code 
> but wasn't sure if the Unisys team was using it or not.  
> Clearly they are so that will have to wait.
> I also wrote a set of patches for Summit clustered APIC 
> support (which are currently untested) so I'm aware of some 
> of the changes which need to be made to the code for 
> re-organization.  I'd like to submit some patches for that 
> but they will conflict with these ES7000 patches.  So I guess 
> we just need to make a decision what the best way forward 
> is/how much re-org we want to do right now.
> 
> Natasha Jarymowycz
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:01:55 +0100, Ian Pratt 
> <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
> > Natasha,
> >
> > Are the generic apic bits of this already handled by your 
> patch? Have 
> > you a 2nd version of it ready?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ian
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel