[email protected] said:
> > This makes sense to me. We use upstream MiniOS now (with some patches to
> > support installation as a library), so we don't need to do anything
> > special to benefit from your patches if you submit them upstream. Have
> > you sent an RFC to xen-devel to get other people's reaction to this? I
> > can't imagine it'll be too contentious if other uses (such as the qemu
> > stub domain) are also fixed up to support this.
>
> Incidentally, it might help to regenerate your patch stream over the
> https://github.com/mirage/xen repository. This is a direct mirror of
> the upstream Xen trees, and we base our Mirage-specific MiniOS off this
> tree. Also CCing Adam Wick from HalVM as this might help him.
I've not yet proposed an RFC to xen-devel. I think that The patches need a
bit more work for that to happen:
- As you mentioned, they should be rebased off the upstream mini-os rather
than the old-ish copy we have in rumprun-xen.
- The patches only rename the bare minumum of APIs and symbols needed by
rumprun-xen. Notably, I don't rename some macros like
local_irq_{save|restore} and so on. For these changes to be usable by
everyone involved we would probably want to do a more thorough
namespacing?
Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
rumpkernel-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rumpkernel-users
