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           : 2300.000000MHz
> >  revision        : 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101)
> >  processor       : 1
> >  cpu             : PPC970MP, altivec supported
> >  clock           : 2300.000000MHz
> >  revision        : 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101)
> >  processor       : 2
> >  cpu             : PPC970MP, altivec supported
> >  clock           : 2300.000000MHz
> >  revision        : 1.1 (pvr 0044 0101)
> >  processor       : 3
> >  cpu             : PPC970MP, altivec supported
> >  clock           : 2300.000000MHz
> >  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

Reply via email to