From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dario Faggioli Subject: Re: Xen nested wiki Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 15:40:41 +0100 Message-ID: <1392388841.32038.263.camel@Solace> References: <1392287382.32038.34.camel@Solace> <52FDEEDB.40305@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5552330549095400601==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <52FDEEDB.40305@eu.citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: "Zhang, Yang Z" , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , "publicity@lists.xenproject.org" , "'Jan Beulich (JBeulich@suse.com)'" , "andrew.cooper3@citrix.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org --===============5552330549095400601== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-bAqudo5HkAOoCWA/Gsud" --=-bAqudo5HkAOoCWA/Gsud Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On ven, 2014-02-14 at 10:24 +0000, George Dunlap wrote: > On 02/14/2014 01:13 AM, Zhang, Yang Z wrote: > > Sorry. I didn't clarify it clearly. Most of the patches to run nested a= re already in Xen upstream. What I want is to add "nested is basically supp= orted in Xen 4.4" in the Xen 4.4 release note to let people know it. >=20 > I'm afraid "basically supported" will imply to people that they might=20 > consider shipping it on production systems. But because of the issues= =20 > with shadow-on-HAP, and the potential locking issues with the nested p2m= =20 > table, both of which are in control of the guest admin rather than the= =20 > host admin, I don't think that's a recommendation we can make at this tim= e. >=20 > But I do think making some kind of announcement about common=20 > functionality being complete and ready to be tested would be a good=20 > idea. When we come to make the release we can brainstorm on what=20 > wording to use. >=20 I agree. Let's not sell something not entirely ready, as that could backfire, but we should at least hint that it's there and it's improved. > Actually, I wonder whether advertising Win7's XP compatibility mode as a= =20 > separate "tech preview" feature would make sense. The people who use=20 > that feature are very likely very different than most other people who= =20 > might think about using nested virtualization. >=20 Completely agree again. And this is something that could be very well described in a blog post on the subject (happening after the release), I think. :-) Regads, Dario --=20 <> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK) --=-bAqudo5HkAOoCWA/Gsud Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEABECAAYFAlL+KukACgkQk4XaBE3IOsQ4tACfXLfD6/UNNwiY8tCd/BYn8rsk Zf0An2kKVXb1Fzy9AozhEaLEXDTxoBhy =bxmP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-bAqudo5HkAOoCWA/Gsud-- --===============5552330549095400601== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel --===============5552330549095400601==--