From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: PGNet Dev Subject: Re: Clarifying PVH mode requirements Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:01:43 -0800 Message-ID: <56B3CA47.7090805@gmail.com> References: <56AE7C3B.7010100@gmail.com> <56AF3336.7040906@citrix.com> <56AF679E.4040104@oracle.com> <56AF7E7A.1040305@gmail.com> <56AFAEA7.9060003@oracle.com> <56AFB1B8.5050202@gmail.com> <56AFB8F7.1040709@oracle.com> <56B0CB17.7040808@oracle.com> Reply-To: PGNet Dev Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <56B0CB17.7040808@oracle.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: boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, bgregg@netflix.com Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Boris Ostrovsky >> Current PVH implementation has never been described as >> production-ready. What is happening now with HVMlite is >> essentially bringing PVH to production-quality level. >> >> >> So should I s/PVH/HVMlite/g? > > From user perspective that will be almost true. I am not sure it should > be classified as PV mode anymore since it's really an HVM guest without > any devices. But it's not there yet so it's too early to point your > editor there. > > BTW, I don't think the flowchart in the wiki is correct as far as PVH is > concerned --- you can't use PVH unless HVM (and, in fact, PVHVM) is > supported. Noting the very recent flurry of HVMLite activity, so where does PVH sit? As it's not production-ready (and, atm, unusable here), is it planned to be? Or is it being simply leap-frogged by HVMLite?