Re: Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option?
- From: Rink Springer <rink@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:09:03 +0200
Hi Kip,
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 08:56:35PM -0700, Kip Macy wrote:
- A shared directory as most of the bits will be shared:
- sys/xen - common bits
- sys/xen/i386 - i386 specific bits
- sys/xen/amd64 - amd64 specific bits
This is what I'd prefer - i386/amd64 as separate dir under sys/xen.
It could, in principle, also be done as a build option. I'm not sure
how well it would mesh with the existing build tools as there are a
number of files that I would not want to compile in (e.g. code that
talked directly to the BIOS) that is normally built by default. In
that case I would structure it:
I wouldn't go for a build option; I'd prefer to make it seperate, as I
fear making it a seperate build option would introduce needless clutter
which can easily be avoided.
There is also a question of where the drivers should be put. I propose
that they would be put under sys/dev/xen, so you would have e.g.
sys/dev/xen/xennet, sys/dev/xen/xenblk etc.
That sounds fine to me.
--
Rink P.W. Springer - http://rink.nu
"root is always right" -- the kernel
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- References:
- Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option?
- From: Kip Macy
- Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option?
- Prev by Date: Re: sensors fun..
- Next by Date: Re: Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option?
- Previous by thread: Re: Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option?
- Next by thread: kernel + /dev/console + syslog
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|