From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: portability issues Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:58:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: <467A66B3.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <467A66B3.76E4.0078.0@novell.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: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 21/6/07 10:53, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >> (1) and (2): I want to kill off use of vcpu_guest_context in dom0 tools, >> make hvm save/restore a generic state load/save interface, and define >> extensible structures at that interface (pass a stream of state chunks back >> and forth at the interface, each chunk having a size in its header, and so >> increasing the size of a chunk allows it to be naturally appended to and >> hence extended). > > I wasn't concerned about the tools interface. The real compatibility problem > is VCPUOP_initialize. I don't see the problem. The guest will not be able to initialise secondary VCPU's sysenter/syscall state via this interface. So what? -- Keir