On 1/1/07 12:21 am, "Rik van Riel" <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> XenSource has usually been less than useful when it comes
> to tracking the upstream kernel. I suspect they'll be
> obsoleted by KVM and/or lhype at some point in the future,
> because those will just be there in the upstream kernel
> while Xen won't.
>
> If XenSource has any intention of having Xen stay relevant
> in the future, they'll want to seriously pursue an upstream
> merge of their code.
There are ongoing efforts from (at least) XenSource, Novell, Red Hat and IBM
to merge Xen support into upstream Linux. The paravirt_ops infrastructure is
already merged for 2.6.20 and we will hopefully see implementations of the
new interface, including Xen, merged for 2.6.21.
As for the Linux sparse tree in xen-unstable, it will be upgraded and moved
to a separate repository before 3.0.5. With the guest kernel interfaces
having been stable for some time, it makes lots of sense to separate
hypervisor development and its release cycle from that of guest kernels.
 -- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel