From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [RFC] Virtual disk configuration, PV vs. emulated, backward compatibility etc Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:45:18 -0700 Message-ID: <4C505E9E.2090109@goop.org> References: <1280246290.5872.8932.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <19536.21817.469833.377542@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <19536.21817.469833.377542@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Jackson Cc: xen-devel , Ian Campbell List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/28/2010 09:05 AM, Ian Jackson wrote: > For Linux HVM guests using PV-on-HVM drivers, users are recommended to > supply as few hd* devices as possible and use pure xvd* devices for > the rest. Modern PV-on-HVM drivers will map the hd* devices to > /dev/xvdHDa etc. I think we've decided to make blkfront register pv versions of emulated devices as hdX/sdX rather than using xvdHD. We don't do this in pv domains. J