Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 6/18 V2]: PVH xen: Introduce PVH guest type

[Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:07:10 +0000
Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 25/03/2013 19:05, "Mukesh Rathor" <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >> These are all ugly, and I don't see why the triplet I suggested
> >> (is_pv, is_pvh, and is_hvm), including their intended use, wouldn't
> >> be acceptable.
> > 
> > Because this implies pvh is a new type, whereas like I said before,
> > PVH is a PV guest. Ok, lets go with your suggestion above, and if
> > people find it confusing, we can change in future.
> 
> It's not really PV -- the interfaces and execution environment are
> somewhat different, evidence being that a legacy PV guest will not
> boot in PVH mode! There are certainly similarities, but then there
> are between HVM and PV too (e.g., many hypercalls), so at the end of
> the day a guest is one of PV/PVH/HVM. So I have to agree with Jan.

LOL... which is why originally I had called it hybrid (neither PV nor
HVM), but then many here convinced me it should be called a PV something
because it was a PV. Anyways, no more on this.

     { is_pv, is_pvh, is_hvm }
it is.

Thanks,
Mukesh

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