Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/19] libxl/xl: add PVH guest type

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 22/08/17 12:30, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:24:29PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 22/08/17 10:49, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This series adds a new PVH guest type to libxl/xl, this supersedes the
>>> current PVHv2 implementation, that relies on using the "none" device
>>> model version.
>>>
>>> As part of this series a new xl option is also implemented, called
>>> "type" that supersedes the current "builder" option. A "firmware"
>>> option is also introduced in order to have a uniform way of loading
>>> firmwares for all guest types (HVM, PV and PVH).
>>>
>>> Patch 1 lifts some fields from the libxl_domain_build_info domain
>>> specific sub-structs into libxl_domain_build_info itself, so they can
>>> be used by all domain types. Patches 2 and 3 introduce the new type
>>> and firmware options. Patch 4 introduces the PVH guest type to libxl.
>>>
>>> Patches from 5 to 17 add PVH support to all the needed functions, this
>>> could be considered a single patch, but I've tried to split it in
>>> order to ease the review. The current split is done on a per file
>>> basis.
>>>
>>> Finally patch 18 adds PVH support to xl and patch 19 removes the
>>> device model version "none".
>> Can we keep none as an option, even if it looses its special PVH
>> meaning?  I've got some plans for XTF testing where part of the test
>> plays the part of qemu by connecting to the ioreq server, and having an
>> ability to configure "no device model - I know what I'm doing" would be
>> necessary.
> I guess you cannot do that with PVH because you want the full set of
> emulated devices by Xen to be available to XTF?

Whether a device model exists is logically independent of the type of guest.

It is important to be able to test all combinations.

~Andrew

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