Re: [XenPPC] Should the platform name be "Xen-Maple"
"platform" is build-time and comes from define_machine(). That should be "Xen". "machine" we can display ourselves via ppc_md.show_cpuinfo(). We can get that from the device tree, just like CHRP does. On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 16:55 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote: > I agree, but in our current Kernel source the string in question > comes from the machine description. > Am I missing something? > -Jx > On Feb 27, 2007, at 3:43 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > > > Jimi, the context is that we need to modify Fedora's installer so that > > it properly detects the system it's running on. That means we're > > implementing a user-visible interface right now. I think "Xen- > > Maple" is > > a terrible name to permanently commit ourselves to. Let's not. > > > > PPC's cpuinfo seems to have a split between "platform" and > > "machine" (where machine is more specific). I think platform = Xen is > > fine, and machine is the underlying machine. > > > > On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 14:56 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote: > >> This comes from the fact that we are running xen from an underlying > >> host platform. > >> for example, if you boot linux without xen but on SLOF your machine > >> name is "Maple". > >> see: > >>arch/powerpc/platforms/xen/setup.c define_machine 246 > >> define_machine(xen) > >> > >> > >> I'd be interested in changing this to "Xen" for DomUs, but Dom0 > >> should reflect the underlying machine type that linux would use > >> without Xen. > >> -JX > >> > >> > >> On Feb 27, 2007, at 2:48 PM, Jerone Young wrote: > >> > >>> In /proc/cpuinfo of a domain0 you see the following: > >>> > >>> processor : 0 > >>> cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > >>> clock : 2300.00MHz > >>> revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > >>> processor : 1 > >>> cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > >>> clock : 2300.00MHz > >>> revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > >>> processor : 2 > >>> cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > >>> clock : 2300.00MHz > >>> revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > >>> processor : 3 > >>> cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > >>> clock : 2300.00MHz > >>> revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > >>> timebase: 14318378 > >>> platform: Xen-Maple > >>> > >>> The "platform" line "Xen-Maple" is currently used by some tools in > >>> distros to identify the platform of the machine. The question I > >>> pose is > >>> should this be changed from "Xen-Maple" since running on Xen does > >>> not > >>> mean you are running on Maple. > >>> > >>> Something like "Xen" would probably be better. What do you guys > >>> think ? > >>> > >>> > >>> ___ > >>> Xen-ppc-devel mailing list > >>> Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com > >>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> Xen-ppc-devel mailing list > >> Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com > >> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel > > -- > > Hollis Blanchard > > IBM Linux Technology Center > > > -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Should the platform name be "Xen-Maple"
I agree, but in our current Kernel source the string in question comes from the machine description. Am I missing something? -Jx On Feb 27, 2007, at 3:43 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote: Jimi, the context is that we need to modify Fedora's installer so that it properly detects the system it's running on. That means we're implementing a user-visible interface right now. I think "Xen- Maple" is a terrible name to permanently commit ourselves to. Let's not. PPC's cpuinfo seems to have a split between "platform" and "machine" (where machine is more specific). I think platform = Xen is fine, and machine is the underlying machine. On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 14:56 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote: This comes from the fact that we are running xen from an underlying host platform. for example, if you boot linux without xen but on SLOF your machine name is "Maple". see: arch/powerpc/platforms/xen/setup.c define_machine 246 define_machine(xen) I'd be interested in changing this to "Xen" for DomUs, but Dom0 should reflect the underlying machine type that linux would use without Xen. -JX On Feb 27, 2007, at 2:48 PM, Jerone Young wrote: In /proc/cpuinfo of a domain0 you see the following: processor : 0 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 1 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 2 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 3 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) timebase: 14318378 platform: Xen-Maple The "platform" line "Xen-Maple" is currently used by some tools in distros to identify the platform of the machine. The question I pose is should this be changed from "Xen-Maple" since running on Xen does not mean you are running on Maple. Something like "Xen" would probably be better. What do you guys think ? ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Should the platform name be "Xen-Maple"
Ok. But there is another thing I left out. Under global firmware you normally have a line "machine:" in /proc/cpuinfo that shows the machine platform you are running on. In case of the JS20s this looks like: machine : CHRP IBM,8842-21X On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 14:56 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote: > This comes from the fact that we are running xen from an underlying > host platform. > for example, if you boot linux without xen but on SLOF your machine > name is "Maple". > see: >arch/powerpc/platforms/xen/setup.c define_machine 246 > define_machine(xen) > > > I'd be interested in changing this to "Xen" for DomUs, but Dom0 > should reflect the underlying machine type that linux would use > without Xen. > -JX > > > On Feb 27, 2007, at 2:48 PM, Jerone Young wrote: > > > In /proc/cpuinfo of a domain0 you see the following: > > > > processor : 0 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > processor : 1 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > processor : 2 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > processor : 3 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > timebase: 14318378 > > platform: Xen-Maple > > > > The "platform" line "Xen-Maple" is currently used by some tools in > > distros to identify the platform of the machine. The question I > > pose is > > should this be changed from "Xen-Maple" since running on Xen does not > > mean you are running on Maple. > > > > Something like "Xen" would probably be better. What do you guys > > think ? > > > > > > ___ > > Xen-ppc-devel mailing list > > Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel > ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Should the platform name be "Xen-Maple"
Jimi, the context is that we need to modify Fedora's installer so that it properly detects the system it's running on. That means we're implementing a user-visible interface right now. I think "Xen-Maple" is a terrible name to permanently commit ourselves to. Let's not. PPC's cpuinfo seems to have a split between "platform" and "machine" (where machine is more specific). I think platform = Xen is fine, and machine is the underlying machine. On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 14:56 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote: > This comes from the fact that we are running xen from an underlying > host platform. > for example, if you boot linux without xen but on SLOF your machine > name is "Maple". > see: >arch/powerpc/platforms/xen/setup.c define_machine 246 > define_machine(xen) > > > I'd be interested in changing this to "Xen" for DomUs, but Dom0 > should reflect the underlying machine type that linux would use > without Xen. > -JX > > > On Feb 27, 2007, at 2:48 PM, Jerone Young wrote: > > > In /proc/cpuinfo of a domain0 you see the following: > > > > processor : 0 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > processor : 1 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > processor : 2 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > processor : 3 > > cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported > > clock : 2300.00MHz > > revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) > > timebase: 14318378 > > platform: Xen-Maple > > > > The "platform" line "Xen-Maple" is currently used by some tools in > > distros to identify the platform of the machine. The question I > > pose is > > should this be changed from "Xen-Maple" since running on Xen does not > > mean you are running on Maple. > > > > Something like "Xen" would probably be better. What do you guys > > think ? > > > > > > ___ > > Xen-ppc-devel mailing list > > Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel > > > ___ > Xen-ppc-devel mailing list > Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
Re: [XenPPC] Should the platform name be "Xen-Maple"
This comes from the fact that we are running xen from an underlying host platform. for example, if you boot linux without xen but on SLOF your machine name is "Maple". see: arch/powerpc/platforms/xen/setup.c define_machine 246 define_machine(xen) I'd be interested in changing this to "Xen" for DomUs, but Dom0 should reflect the underlying machine type that linux would use without Xen. -JX On Feb 27, 2007, at 2:48 PM, Jerone Young wrote: In /proc/cpuinfo of a domain0 you see the following: processor : 0 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 1 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 2 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 3 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) timebase: 14318378 platform: Xen-Maple The "platform" line "Xen-Maple" is currently used by some tools in distros to identify the platform of the machine. The question I pose is should this be changed from "Xen-Maple" since running on Xen does not mean you are running on Maple. Something like "Xen" would probably be better. What do you guys think ? ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
[XenPPC] Should the platform name be "Xen-Maple"
In /proc/cpuinfo of a domain0 you see the following: processor : 0 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 1 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 2 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) processor : 3 cpu : PPC970MP, altivec supported clock : 2300.00MHz revision: 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101) timebase: 14318378 platform: Xen-Maple The "platform" line "Xen-Maple" is currently used by some tools in distros to identify the platform of the machine. The question I pose is should this be changed from "Xen-Maple" since running on Xen does not mean you are running on Maple. Something like "Xen" would probably be better. What do you guys think ? ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
[XenPPC] FYI: xenppc-unstable updated
I pushed a xen-unstable merge to xenppc-unstable yesterday. It pretty much shouldn't matter, and we aren't all the way caught up with upstream xen-unstable yet, but just FYI. -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center ___ Xen-ppc-devel mailing list Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel
