From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: Paravirtualization on VMware's Platform [VMI]. Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:00:00 +0300 Message-ID: <4AB67BB0.3020303@redhat.com> References: <1253233028.19731.63.camel@ank32.eng.vmware.com> <20090919224430.GB9567@kroah.com> <1253419185.3253.21.camel@ank32.eng.vmware.com> <20090920074247.GA5733@elte.hu> <20090920095239.456ad6f2@infradead.org> <4AB5EF25.9070502@redhat.com> <4AB64EFC.10707@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4AB64EFC.10707@goop.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Andrew Morton , Greg KH , the arch/x86 maintainers , Alok Kataria , LKML , Chris Wright , "virtualization@lists.osdl.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On 09/20/2009 06:49 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> kvm will be removing the pvmmu support soon; and Xen is talking about >> running paravirtualized guests in a vmx/svm container where they don't >> need most of the hooks. >> >> > We have no plans to drop support for non-vmx/svm capable processors, let > alone require ept/npt. > Today, certainly; similarly kvm will host-side pvmmu support for a while to support live migration from older hosts. But in a few years it may make sense to run everything in a vmx/svm container even for Xen; we can then drop x86 pv_ops for good. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.