On 11/02/2011 05:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/01/2011 08:08 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
memory API to 128 bits.
It has been argued that with careful coding we can make 64-bit wor
On 11/01/2011 03:48 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> >
> > Since it's just internal, I'll just pull this series and if we want to
> > change it post 1.0, we can.
>
> FWIW I must say I don't like where this is heading... iiuc just because
> of a zero-or-full-64-bits issue with start+end
It's not just
On 11/01/2011 08:08 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
>> memory API to 128 bits.
>>
>> It has been argued that with careful coding we can make 64-bit work as
>> well. I don't think this
On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
memory API to 128 bits.
It has been argued that with careful coding we can make 64-bit work as
well. I don't think this is true in general - a memory router can adjust
addresses ei
Am 01.11.2011 13:59, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> On 11/01/2011 03:43 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 11/01/2011 02:54 AM, David Gibson wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:05:47AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> This somewhat controversial patchset con
On 11/01/2011 03:43 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 11/01/2011 02:54 AM, David Gibson wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:05:47AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
memory API to 128 bits.
Gi
On 11/01/2011 02:54 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:05:47AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > >This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
> > >memory API to 128 bits.
> >
> > Given the level of controv
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:05:47AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
> >memory API to 128 bits.
>
> Given the level of controversy, what do you think about deferring
> this to 1.1?
On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
memory API to 128 bits.
Given the level of controversy, what do you think about deferring this to 1.1?
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
It has been argued that with careful coding we
On 10/31/2011 02:36 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> >
> > There is no direct use of signed arithmetic in the API (just in the
> > implementation). Aliases can cause a region to move in either the
> > positive or negative direction, and this requires either signed
> > arithmetic or special casing the tw
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 04:19:51PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 04:12 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
> >> memory API to 128 bits.
> >>
> >> It has been argued that wit
On 10/30/2011 04:59 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >
> > There is no direct use of signed arithmetic in the API (just in the
> > implementation). Aliases can cause a region to move in either the
> > positive or negative direction, and this requires either signed
> > arithmetic or special casing the two d
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 14:19, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 04:12 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
>>> memory API to 128 bits.
>>>
>>> It has been argued that with careful codin
On 10/30/2011 04:12 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
>> memory API to 128 bits.
>>
>> It has been argued that with careful coding we can make 64-bit work as
>> well. I don't think this
On 10/30/2011 09:02 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
This somewhat controversial patchset converts internal arithmetic in the
memory API to 128 bits.
It has been argued that with careful coding we can make 64-bit work as
well. I don't think this is true in general - a memory router can adjust
addresses ei
15 matches
Mail list logo
