Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] compat-mode/HVM support in xenctx

To:	Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] compat-mode/HVM support in xenctx
From:	Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:28:30 +0000
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Mon, 05 Jan 2009 03:29:22 -0800
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20090105111045.GJ12729@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AclvKLv8IxQnLATRqUK9GuHW0dPBUg==
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] [PATCH] compat-mode/HVM support in xenctx
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/12.14.0.081024

On 05/01/2009 11:10, "Tim Deegan" <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Maybe add a VGCF_ or dummy ourselves up a fake CR5 where we can stash these
>> kinds of low-level flags.
> 
> I was thinking of extending the HVM save support to allow a particular
> type and instance to be requested.  That would let us get the full
> register set for a HVM vcpu without walking the whole save record.
> But a VGCF_long_mode or similar would be quicker and easier. :)

I'd prefer the former, of course! But I'd settle for the latter. Overall it
prolongs the agony though, imo.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] compat-mode/HVM support in xenctx