From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: Re: Linux Stubdom Problem Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 14:11:45 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" 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 , Tim Deegan Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Ian Campbell , Jiageng Yu , Anthony PERARD , Samuel Thibault List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 02/09/2011 14:09, "Stefano Stabellini" wrote: >> Why? HVMloader is already tightly coupled to the hypervisor and the >> toostack - special cases for stubdoms should be fine. > > I think think that leaking the implementation details of the device > model into hvmloader should be avoided, but obviously if there are no > alternatives, it can be done. This is a fair and more general point, that we don't want fragile dependencies on qemu now that we are using upstream. But as I say that's a more general point on our policy regarding qemu, rather than something specifically concerning hvmloader. -- Keir