From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: Xen 4.4 development update Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:06:51 +0100 Message-ID: <520A599B.6010901@eu.citrix.com> References: <1375979079.14651.13.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1375979079.14651.13.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 08/08/13 17:24, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-08 at 17:14 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: >>> * qxl >>> > http://bugs.xenproject.org/xen/bug/11http://bugs.xenproject.org/xen/bug/11 >>> - Uninitialized struct element in qemu >>> - Revert 5479961 to re-enable qxl in xl,libxl >>> - Option in Xen top-level to enable qxl support in qemu tree >>> - Fix sse2 MMIO issue >> qxl has been re-enabled, > Has it? I can't see a patch with qxl in the title after "libxl: Remove > qxl support for the 4.3 release". Oh, right -- I thought I'd seen it go in; but I guess not. > >> but we still haven't had anyone step up to implement >8-byte IO >> instructions. Any takers? > Assuming I'm right and it hasn't been enabled is there any reason this > shouldn't be a prerequisite for enabling qxl? I wouldn't think so -- I view the extended instruction support as a bug. In any case, having the qxl functionality will make an easy way for developers to test the vector instruction functionality. -George