From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [HYBRID]: status update... Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 12:05:15 -0400 Message-ID: <20120801160515.GA16155@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20120626181707.4203d336@mantra.us.oracle.com> <20120801152508.GA7132@phenom.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: Ian Campbell , "Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Keir Fraser , "stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:59:58PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:25:01PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > >> I hope this isn't bikeshedding; but I don't like "Hybrid" as a name > >> for this feature, mainly for "marketing" reasons. I think it will > >> probably give people the wrong idea about what the technology does. > >> PV domains is one of Xen's really distinct advantages -- much simpler > >> interface, lighter-weight (no qemu, legacy boot), &c &c. As I > >> understand it, the mode you've been calling "hybrid" still has all of > >> these advantages -- it just uses some of the HVM hardware extensions > >> to make the interface even simpler / faster. I'm afraid "hybrid" may > >> be seen as, "Even Xen has had to give up on PV." > >> > >> Can I suggest something like "PVH" instead? That (at least to me) > >> makes it clear that PV domains are still fully PV, but just use some > >> HVM extensions. > > > > if (xen_pvh_domain()? > > > > if (xen_pv_h_domain()? > > > > if (xen_h_domain()) ? > > > > if (xen_pvplus_domain()) ? > > > > if (xen_pv_ext_domain()) ? > > > > I think I like 'pv+'? > > I could deal with pv+. However, in general I dislike that kind of > "now even better!" marketing. PV+, EPV (Enhanced / extended PV), PVX > (Extreme PV!) -- they all sound cool when they come out, but five > years later, when they're not so new or sexy anymore, they all sound > lame. PVH is just descriptive -- it will always be PV with HVM > extensions, so it will age much better. :-) How about pv_with_mmu_in_hvm_container_domain() ? Ok, that is a bit to lengthy. How about then: if (xen_pvhvm_ext_domain()) ? The 'if (xen_pvh_domain())' is just one characer short of 'xen_pv_domain()' and one might not notice it. Perhaps then 'if (xen_pv_h_domain()' ? > > -George > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel