From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 22 11:21:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D1216A419 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:21:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1726513C4B0 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:21:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IjvKt-0003Cf-39 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:20:43 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:20:43 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:20:43 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:22:11 +0200 Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070801) In-Reply-To: Sender: news Subject: Re: Should Xen be a sub-arch or a build option? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:21:13 -0000 Kip Macy wrote: > 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: > > - sys/i386/xen - xen specific bits for i386 > - sys/amd64/xen - xen specific bits for amd64 I can only speak as an end-user: could it be done so that the Xen-enabled kernel is bootable on a normal non-virtualized machine? In this case it would be ideal if it's implemented as a build option, so people can share kernels across the machines. If not, then it certainly looks like a separate architecture. > 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. In the above case (build option), this looks reasonable.