* PVHv2 vs HVMlite
@ 2016-09-27 14:08 Boris Ostrovsky
2016-09-27 14:19 ` David Vrabel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Boris Ostrovsky @ 2016-09-27 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: Juergen Gross, Lars Kurth, David Vrabel, Roger Pau Monné
I will be dusting off Linux domU PVHv2 patches now that ACPI changes are
getting close to being accepted.
Last version of that patch referred to these guests as 'hvmlite',
including in names of variables, routines etc. I was hesitant to remove
"classic" PVH code and use "pvh" instead of "hvmlite" because we didn't
have dom0 v2 support and so I kept existing PVHv1 code intact.
Do we still want to do this (i.e. keep v1 code and use "hvmlite")? FWIW,
I am not aware of anyone using PVH dom0 (or PVH domU for that matter).
-boris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: PVHv2 vs HVMlite
2016-09-27 14:08 PVHv2 vs HVMlite Boris Ostrovsky
@ 2016-09-27 14:19 ` David Vrabel
2016-09-27 14:36 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-09-27 14:45 ` Juergen Gross
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Vrabel @ 2016-09-27 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Boris Ostrovsky, xen-devel
Cc: Juergen Gross, Lars Kurth, David Vrabel, Roger Pau Monné
On 27/09/16 15:08, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> I will be dusting off Linux domU PVHv2 patches now that ACPI changes are
> getting close to being accepted.
>
> Last version of that patch referred to these guests as 'hvmlite',
> including in names of variables, routines etc. I was hesitant to remove
> "classic" PVH code and use "pvh" instead of "hvmlite" because we didn't
> have dom0 v2 support and so I kept existing PVHv1 code intact.
>
> Do we still want to do this (i.e. keep v1 code and use "hvmlite")? FWIW,
> I am not aware of anyone using PVH dom0 (or PVH domU for that matter).
I think we should remove the PVHv1 code from Linux and then reuse the
"pvh" name.
David
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: PVHv2 vs HVMlite
2016-09-27 14:19 ` David Vrabel
@ 2016-09-27 14:36 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-09-27 14:45 ` Juergen Gross
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk @ 2016-09-27 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Vrabel
Cc: Juergen Gross, Lars Kurth, Boris Ostrovsky, Roger Pau Monné,
xen-devel
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 03:19:32PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 27/09/16 15:08, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > I will be dusting off Linux domU PVHv2 patches now that ACPI changes are
> > getting close to being accepted.
> >
> > Last version of that patch referred to these guests as 'hvmlite',
> > including in names of variables, routines etc. I was hesitant to remove
> > "classic" PVH code and use "pvh" instead of "hvmlite" because we didn't
> > have dom0 v2 support and so I kept existing PVHv1 code intact.
> >
> > Do we still want to do this (i.e. keep v1 code and use "hvmlite")? FWIW,
> > I am not aware of anyone using PVH dom0 (or PVH domU for that matter).
>
> I think we should remove the PVHv1 code from Linux and then reuse the
> "pvh" name.
+1
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: PVHv2 vs HVMlite
2016-09-27 14:19 ` David Vrabel
2016-09-27 14:36 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
@ 2016-09-27 14:45 ` Juergen Gross
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Juergen Gross @ 2016-09-27 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Vrabel, Boris Ostrovsky, xen-devel; +Cc: Lars Kurth, Roger Pau Monné
On 27/09/16 16:19, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 27/09/16 15:08, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> I will be dusting off Linux domU PVHv2 patches now that ACPI changes are
>> getting close to being accepted.
>>
>> Last version of that patch referred to these guests as 'hvmlite',
>> including in names of variables, routines etc. I was hesitant to remove
>> "classic" PVH code and use "pvh" instead of "hvmlite" because we didn't
>> have dom0 v2 support and so I kept existing PVHv1 code intact.
>>
>> Do we still want to do this (i.e. keep v1 code and use "hvmlite")? FWIW,
>> I am not aware of anyone using PVH dom0 (or PVH domU for that matter).
>
> I think we should remove the PVHv1 code from Linux and then reuse the
> "pvh" name.
+1
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-09-27 14:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-09-27 14:08 PVHv2 vs HVMlite Boris Ostrovsky
2016-09-27 14:19 ` David Vrabel
2016-09-27 14:36 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2016-09-27 14:45 ` Juergen Gross
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.