From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261920AbULPEBj (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:01:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261924AbULPEBj (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:01:39 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:10126 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261920AbULPEBi (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:01:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:01:37 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Alan Cox Cc: Andi Kleen , Ian Pratt , Rik van Riel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , akpm@osdl.org, Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk, Christian.Limpach@cl.cam.ac.uk, Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk Subject: Re: arch/xen is a bad idea Message-ID: <20041216040136.GA30555@wotan.suse.de> References: <20041215044927.GF27225@wotan.suse.de> <1103155782.3585.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1103155782.3585.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 12:09:44AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Mer, 2004-12-15 at 04:49, Andi Kleen wrote: > > I think that's definitely the wrong way. Also in Linux > > the standard strategy is to first clean up and restructure/refactor > > code and then merge, not the other way round. > > Must be two different Linux OS's out there then. I thought it was > - get interfaces right That is exactly the part that is wrong currently imho. The arch/xen interface is a mess and in its current form unlikely to be maintainable. -Andi