Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for tuesday 31

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5 March 2012 15:43, Andreas Färber <afaerber@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mid-term also depends on how me want to proceed with LPAE softmmu-wise
> (bump "arm" to 64-bit target_phys_addr_t, or do LPAE and AArch64 in a
> new "arm64").

For LPAE I would have thought we want to make "arm" go to a 64 bit
target_phys_addr_t, since that's exactly what it is: same old
ARM architecture with wider physical addresses :-)

I notice that for the architectures we currently have that have
32 and 64 bit versions we have separate {i386,x86_64}-softmmu,
{ppc,ppc64}-softmmu, {mips,mips64}-softmmu. What's the advantage
of separating out the 64 bit flavours that way rather than
having everything be a single binary?

-- PMM
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux