On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 14:05 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > The thing is others and I (and you) are working on getting paravirt_ops > > working for x86_64. There's a lot of overlap between i386 and x86_64. > > Right now the i386 is ahead of x86_64 and the code seems to be put more > > in the arch/i386 arch. So now we are going to introduce a > > new ../../i386 hack to get to a shared paravirt_shared.c(?). Or do we > > What would you like exactly to share?
I'm still working on that. Others have pressured us into consolidating as much usable code for i386 into x86_64. This may turn out not to be too feasible anyway. > > > just continue on keeping the x86_64 as a separate entity, with a lot of > > duplicate code? > > When it makes sense to share the code it can be shared. That is already > done today. But the existing Makefile mechanisms work fine for that. > > Making sense: > - There is actually a lot of shared code > - The supported hardware is the same (remember x86-64 is only for > modern x86 hardware, while i386 has a much longer legacy) > - No ifdefs Thanks, I'll keep this in mind. -- Steve - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
