Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:55:34 +0200 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7] KVM: Kernel-based Virtual Machine |
| |
Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Sunday 22 October 2006 20:41, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>> Ok, but if you radically change the kernel<->user API, doesn't that mean >>> you have to upgrade in the same way? >>> >> No, why? I'd just upgrade the userspace. Am I misunderstanding you? >> > > If you change the kernel interface, you also have to change the kernel > itself, at least if you introduce new syscalls. > >
But I don't have to upgrade all my software to 64 bit [but 32-bit emulation solves that].
Still, an upgrade to the next 32-bit kernel could be seen as less threatening.
>>> The 32 bit emulation mode in x86_64 >>> is actually pretty complete, so it probably boils down to a kernel >>> upgrade for you, without having to touch any of the user space. >>> >>> >> For me personally, I don't mind. I don't know about others. >> > > I'd really love to see your code in get into the mainline kernel, > but I'd consider 32 bit host support an unnecessary burden for > long-term maintenance. Maybe you could maintain the 32 bit version > out of tree as long as there is still interest? I would expect that > at least the point where it works out of the box on x86_64 > distros is when it becomes completely obsolete. >
One of my motivations was to get testers who run 32-bit for historical or flash plugin reasons.
If there is a consensus that it should be dropped, though, I'll drop it. I certainly didn't have any fun getting it to run.
-- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |