From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
TimDeegan <tim@xen.org>, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Convert shadow-paging to Kconfig
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:47:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <569E3E89.5010604@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <569E4A6E02000078000C891A@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On 19/01/16 13:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 19.01.16 at 14:30, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 19/01/16 13:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 19.01.16 at 10:46, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2016-01-18 at 18:40 +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>>>> Does this have any impact on migration of either PV or HVM guests? What
>>>> about nested virt?
>>> At least PV guests won't be migratable anymore when there's no
>>> shadow mode.
>> What? Shadow mode (or lack thereof) has no impact whatsoever on migration.
> So how would log-dirty mode work for a PV guest without shadow
> code?
Oops yes. I am confusing the fact that logdirty and vram tracking are
independent, rather than logdiry and shadow. (we have far too many modes)
I should update the text to talk about migration.
~Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-19 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-18 18:40 [PATCH] x86: Convert shadow-paging to Kconfig Andrew Cooper
2016-01-18 22:53 ` Doug Goldstein
2016-01-19 9:46 ` Ian Campbell
2016-01-19 13:23 ` Jan Beulich
2016-01-19 13:30 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-01-19 13:38 ` Jan Beulich
2016-01-19 13:47 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2016-01-19 13:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-01-19 13:50 ` Ian Campbell
2016-01-19 13:54 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-01-19 13:46 ` Tim Deegan
2016-01-19 13:51 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-01-19 13:27 ` Jan Beulich
2016-01-19 13:33 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-01-19 13:39 ` Jan Beulich
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-01-29 18:20 Andrew Cooper
2016-01-29 21:46 ` Doug Goldstein
2016-02-01 9:54 ` Tim Deegan
2016-02-02 11:39 ` George Dunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=569E3E89.5010604@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=cardoe@cardoe.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.