From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: Configuration of nestedhvm Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 12:29:47 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1A42CE6F5F474C41B63392A5F80372B22DBEA634@shsmsx501.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1A42CE6F5F474C41B63392A5F80372B22DBEA634@shsmsx501.ccr.corp.intel.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: "Dong, Eddie" Cc: Xen-devel , Ian Jackson List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 08/10/2010 09:47, "Dong, Eddie" wrote: >> use of is_nestedhvm(). So again it depends on that, mainly tool-side, >> patch. > > It is chicken and egg then :) emulation of per domain setting hypercall relies > on the global setting. is_nestedhvm relies on the per domain setting :) > > But it is fine too, as if you want the global control, and Chris may merge the > patch into his if he needs to repost.. > >> >> -- Keir > > So can Ian have a look at the previous Chris patch again? What is the reason > to block that patch? Best ask him. Cc'ing him on this email. -- Keir