From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Subject: Re: Configuration of nestedhvm
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 08:12:04 +0100
Message-ID: <C8D482D4.256E2%keir@xen.org>
References: <1A42CE6F5F474C41B63392A5F80372B22DBEA36C@shsmsx501.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <1A42CE6F5F474C41B63392A5F80372B22DBEA36C@shsmsx501.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@intel.com>
Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 08/10/2010 05:34, "Dong, Eddie" <eddie.dong@intel.com> wrote:

> Nested virtualization usage model is emerging, however we must guarantee it
> won't impact the performance of simple virtualization.
> This patch add an boot parameter for nested virtualization, which is disabled
> by default for now.

What's the point when a per-domain config option is going to be implemented?
You can then simply not configure nestedhvm for a domain you want to test
without that capability? I suppose it makes your second patch make a bit
more sense than it would in total isolation.

I think patch#2 probably makes sense, but it should wait for the patch that
actually implements the per-domain config option, and properly implements
is_nestedhvm(), before going in.

 -- Keir