FreeBSD/xen structure

[gnn at freebsd.org]

At Mon, 28 May 2007 15:01:01 +0200,
Rink Springer wrote:
> 
> 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.

This looks correct to me, and I think following the pc98
"sub-architecture" model is the right way to go.

Thanks for working on this!  Please let us know when it's ready to
play with.

Thanks,
George