Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 15:01:01 +0200 From: Rink Springer <rink@FreeBSD.org> To: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: FreeBSD/xen structure Message-ID: <20070528130101.GD48357@rink.nu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi everyone, As I've just mailed to current@, work is well underway on the Xen porting effort. However, as not only I but a lot of people will want to see this work integrated into CURRENT at some point, I'd like to raise a discussion on the directory layout I'm using. It has not changed from Kip Macy's perforce tree, but I want to ensure that this will be suitable for inclusion in the tree. Basically, i386-xen (it's i386 only for now) is a sub-architecture just like pc98. The layout is the following: i386-xen/ Xen main tree compile/ Compile tree conf/ Kernel configs i386-xen/ Low-level code, comparable to i386/i386/ include/ Include files - most include their i386/include/ version, but some are different or extended. This is basically the machine-dependant stuff. Should a port of amd64-xen happen in the future, it would go using a simular directory layout. Xen-dependant but architecture-independant drivers (such as the Xen block device drivers) are put in the dev/xen directory. It should be possible to use these drivers in a amd64-xen version as well. I'd prefer to keep Xen in a i386-xen tree, as there are quite a lot of changes, comparable to the amd64 <-> i386 split. And I am sure we are not really in favour for douzens of #ifdef XEN's in the tree. Are there any questions, comments, remarks etc. on this layout? You can inspect the work in perforce (//projects/xen3); currently, none of my changes have been committed, but the layout is the same. Thanks, -- Rink P.W. Springer - http://rink.nu "It is such a quiet thing, to fall. But yet a far more terrible thing, to admit it." - Darth Traya
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070528130101.GD48357>