Re: [Xen-devel] [rumpuserxen baseline test] 26359: tolerable FAIL

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 11:30 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [rumpuserxen baseline test] 26359: 
> tolerable FAIL"):
> > This set of tests suggests that rump kernels are i386 only, or we are
> > only using i386 rumpkernels, is that right?
> 
> Hrm, I have been using i386 just because that happened to be my build
> environment but it looks like the rump kernel setup is supposed to do
> amd64 too.
> 
> I haven't looked at how hard it would be to fix that.  It's tempting
> just enable the -amd64 test and see what falls out.

Sounds fine to me ;-)

> > I've always had it in mind that in the absence of other requirements
> > (e.g. pvgrub kexec) stubdoms would be better off being 64 bit, since
> > they can take advantage of the larger address space and being single
> > address space applications don't suffer from syscall overhead.
> 
> True.
> 
> Ian.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel