Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC v13 03/20] Introduce pv guest type and has_hvm_container macros

[Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

At 17:49 +0100 on 23 Sep (1379958583), George Dunlap wrote:
> The goal of this patch is to classify conditionals more clearly, as to
> whether they relate to pv guests, hvm-only guests, or guests with an
> "hvm container" (which will eventually include PVH).

 - speculative wombling begins -

Reading this for the (apparently) 13th time, it strikes me that this
distinction feels wrong, like entities are being multiplied beyond
necessity.

A PVH guest is basically a HVM guest that starts with paging enabled and
uses event channel instead of virtual APIC.

I'm not sure this needs any special treatment from Xen.  We can supply a
PVH guest with an APIC and if it never uses it, fine.  And we can supply
all HVM guests with any extra hypercalls that PVH needs (for vcpu
bringup &c).  Things like not having a qemu process to serve ioreqs can
be arranged by the toolstack.

This is from a position of ignorance, of course, and I'm happy to be
corrected by the people who've actually been hacking on the code.

 - normal wombling resumes -

Tim.

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