Re: [Xen-devel] Questions about PVH in Xen 4.3 unstable

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2013-01-30 at 12:20 +0000, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Roger Pau MonnÃ, le Wed 30 Jan 2013 11:11:00 +0000, a Ãcrit :
> > On 30/01/13 11:04, George Dunlap wrote:
> > > Yes, PVH is an extension of PV; so only operating systems which can be
> > > ported to PV will support PVH.
> > 
> > Isn't it probably easier to port a system with PVHVM support to PVH?
> 
> In general, no. Porting a system to PV involves a lot of tricky things
> deep in the OS, while writing a PV driver is much less involving.

But in some sense the work for PVH is a superset of that for PVHVM, so
in that sense it would be easier to port an OS with existing PVHVM
support to PVH (which I think may have been what Roger was asking).

It is certainly the case that porting to PVH should be much easier than
a port to regular PV.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel