Re: [User-mode-linux-devel] UML on non-x86?

[Jeff D. <jd...@ka...>]

> Well, there's at least one now... 

Cool...

> Here are some notes from what I've done so far... 

Can you make your ongoing diffs available somewhere?  I'm going to run a 
parallel effort and do the i386 port.

> but a lot of the time it's just things like changing "UESP" to "PT_R1"
> or whatever it is.  I haven't yet decided whether I think having
> constants like "UM_STACK_REGISTER" or "UM_RETURN_REGISTER", or whether
> it's better to keep the code entirely separate.

If it's just a matter of changing the register number, and the logic is 
exactly the same, I was planning on introducing things like UM_SP and UM_IP, 
and have the different arches define them.

> The pt_regs structure (the ppc one, not the um one) is quite different
> (unsurprisingly).  I've been using that in a few places instead of an
> array of length 17, eg the thread_struct.

The register arrays are going to have to analagous to the thread structure - 
defined by the underlying arch and included in the thread structure, so the 
i386 unsigned long[17] will go into the i386 arch and you can define whatever 
you need for ppc.

> The checksum.S linked to from the arch/ppc/lib didn't compile, since
> some of the redirected <asm/*.h> includes broke things.  For now I've
> copied the file and included some stuff from <asm-ppc/*.h>. 

Things like this will need to be handled by the arch.  I guess I can include 
the arch Makefile and it can add things to $OBJS.  BTW, feel free to steal 
code from arch/ppc.  It saves a lot of work :-)

> How far away is that?  :-)

Pretty far, I think :-)

				Jeff