[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen: drop anti-dependency on X86_VISWS
- To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 11:07:38 -0700
- Cc: "randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx" <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <Jeremy.Fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, "eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx" <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx>, "konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx" <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, "netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "mirq-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <mirq-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "mingo@xxxxxxxxxx" <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "hpa@xxxxxxxxx" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux-visws-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-visws-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "pazke@xxxxxxxxx" <pazke@xxxxxxxxx>, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 11:08:21 -0700
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
On 04/06/2011 11:58 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:45 +0100, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:55:55 +0100
>>
>>> You mean the "!X86_VISWS" I presume? It doesn't make sense to me either.
>> No, I think 32-bit x86 allmodconfig elides XEN because of it's X86_TSC
>> dependency.
> TSC is a real dependency of the Xen interfaces.
Not really. The TSC register is a requirement, but that's going to be
present on any CPU which can boot Xen. We don't need any of the
kernel's TSC machinery though.
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
