On 10.08.2023 12:43, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> On 10 Aug 2023, at 10:07, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >> On 09.08.2023 21:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> Would the x86 maintainers be OK with it too? Of course further changes >>> will be needed to make it useable on x86, but looking at the series from >>> Christopher, the two sets of internal interfaces (dom0less/ARM and >>> hyperlaunch/x86) are very much aligned and similar already. >> >> Moving common code to common/ is surely okay with me. How much wants >> moving is (apparently) a different question. > > Would x86 maintainers (and who is taking care of common/) be ok for the > dom0less > code to be part of common/ but in this first stage be protected by a > dependency on the > Kconfig ARM?
It's actually more than just being okay with this: I wouldn't be okay with there not being such a guard, as then x86 binaries would carry dead code. Jan
