From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [patch 00/21] Xen-paravirt: Xen guest implementation for paravirt_ops interface Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:02:58 -0800 Message-ID: <45DCA572.9090704@goop.org> References: <20070216022449.739760547@goop.org> <45D61C74.2000601@vmware.com> <45D626BB.20007@vmware.com> <20070217135112.GA15102@muc.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Zachary Amsden , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Rusty Russell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wright , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Christoph Lameter wrote: > And it seems that the hooks are not generic but bound to a particular > hypervisor. Should the Xen specific stuff not be in the binary blob? Xen has no "binary blob". It needs guests to cooperate with it by making hypercalls; all that code is in the Xen implementation of the paravirt_ops interface, which is just ordinary code which lives in the kernel sources. J