[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 09/14] xen/x86: split Dom0 build into PV and PVHv2
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 09:18:13AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 16.12.16 at 15:28, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 09:07:16AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 30.11.16 at 17:49, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > --- a/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown > >> > +++ b/docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown > >> > @@ -656,6 +656,23 @@ affinities to prefer but be not limited to the > >> > specified node(s). > >> > > >> > Pin dom0 vcpus to their respective pcpus > >> > > >> > +### dom0 > >> > +> `= List of [ hvm | shadow ]` > >> > + > >> > +> Sub-options: > >> > + > >> > +> `hvm` > >> > + > >> > +> Default: `false` > >> > + > >> > +Flag that makes a dom0 boot in PVHv2 mode. > >> > + > >> > +> `shadow` > >> > + > >> > +> Default: `false` > >> > + > >> > +Flag that makes a dom0 use shadow paging. > >> > >> Would you mind marking dom0_shadow deprecated at once? In fact > >> I wouldn't mind if it was removed from the documentation altogether, > >> the more that it still has no description at all. > > > > Sure, AFAICT it's just removing it from the documentation and a single usage > > in construct_dom0_pv (the one in compute_dom0_nr_pages needs to stay for > > PVHv2 > > Dom0). > > Just to avoid any misunderstanding: I talked about documentation > only, not about removing anything from code. So, you just want to remove the documentation line about dom0_shadow and leave the option there? It seems kind of pointless to me, the more that a) it's not going to be documented and b) AFAIK it's not working. Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |