From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 5] PV on HVM Xen Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:23:32 -0700 Message-ID: <4B9FBE94.4020303@goop.org> References: <201003151205.29964.sheng@linux.intel.com> <4B9EBE03.4080105@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Sheng Yang List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 03/16/2010 04:07 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > OK, you are right: having an explicit "set/remove tsc offset" is > the best solution. > I wonder if we should include scale in that API, since I think future CPUs will allow that to be set too. (If its not supported, then the call will fail if the scale is anything other than 1.) J