[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC, PATCH 5/24] i386 Vmi code patching
- To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
- From: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 13:40:25 -0800
- Cc: Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pratap Subrahmanyam <pratap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>, Joshua LeVasseur <jtl@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Hecht <dhecht@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jack Lo <jlo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Christopher Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx>, Anne Holler <anne@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jyothy Reddy <jreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kip Macy <kmacy@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ky Srinivasan <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Leendert van Doorn <leendert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dan Arai <arai@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:49:55 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
* Andi Kleen (ak@xxxxxxx) wrote:
> The disassembly stuff indeed doesn't look like something
> that belongs in the kernel.
Strongly agreed. The strict ABI requirements put forth here are not
in-line with Linux, IMO. I think source compatibility is the limit of
reasonable, and any ROM code be in-tree if something like this were to
be viable upstream.
thanks,
-chris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
