From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: Xen Signature == "NovellShimHv" ??? Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 22:03:12 -0400 Message-ID: <20090915020312.GA24497@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20090915012208.GA23801@phenom.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: James Harper Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:41:41AM +1000, James Harper wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:24:43AM +1000, James Harper wrote: > > > A user of GPLPV is reporting a problem with the drivers on Windows > 2008, > > > and it appears that GPLPV is finding a signature of 'NovellShimHv' > > > instead of 'XenVMMXenVMM'. > > > > > > Can anyone suggest a reason for this? > > > > SLES10 SP2 Xen has the code for this. It is basically an early version > of the > > Veridian interface. > > Ah. Hmmm. So does that mean that PV drivers on HVM domains (windows or > Linux) aren't going to work at all? Should I check for both I don't think you need to worry about Linux. The shim enabled extra functionality so that under Windows 2008 (and further) you wouldn't hit the BSOD watchdog failure. I don't think any extra functionaly was provided besides that. > 'NovellShimHv' and 'XenVMMXenVMM'? I notice that the unmodified drivers > tree under xen doesn't check for this, and neither does hvmloader. Correct. SLES version to my recollection never made it to Xen-devel. > > James >