From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH]mini-os: big-endian mini-os on ia64 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:51:54 +0000 Message-ID: References: <200702271055.46514.dietmar.hahn@fujitsu-siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200702271055.46514.dietmar.hahn@fujitsu-siemens.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Dietmar Hahn , Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Grzegorz Milos , Xen-ia64-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 27/2/07 09:55, "Dietmar Hahn" wrote: > What I want to have is a mini-os, where everybody whith ia64 hardware can > build and run a BE mini-os beside LE mini-os (or other domU's) on xen-ia64 > hypervisor. If you say at this point: no interrest for such a thing, than we > can stop this discussion here. I don;t think we'd have a problem with incorportaing support for ia64-be if there's a good reason for it (a better reason than "because it's possible"). > The other way would be building wrappers around all the accesses to > domU/hypervisor interfaces and hide the SWAPs there. But this seems a little > bit overkill at this stage. It would be less ugly and I think less prone to missing some open-coded accesses. Open-coding the SWAP()s is pretty grim. -- Keir