On Thursday 17 September 2009 03:11:49 Frank van der Linden wrote:
> Keir Fraser wrote:
> > On 16/09/2009 09:44, "Yang, Sheng" <sheng.yang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Hi Keir & Jeremy
> >>
> >> Here is the hypervisor part of hybrid extension support.
> >>
> >> Please review, thanks!
> >
> > The principle is okay I guess. These changes would have to be trickled in
> > with a really good explanation and justification for each one. For
> > example, I'm not clear why the enable-hybrid hypercall is needed. Why not
> > just provide access to evtchn and timer hypercalls always, and guest sues
> > them if it is capable of it? I'm also not sure why PV timer events get
> > routed to irq0 -- why not via an event channel as usual, now that you are
> > enabling HVM guests to use the evtchn subsystem? What's a hybrid gnttab,
> > and why does it need an explciit reserved e820 region? And so on.
> >
> > The general principle of these patches seems to be to create a set of
> > individual, and perhaps largely independent, accelerations/enlightenments
> > to the HVM interface. I can at least agree with and support that aim.
> >
> > -- Keir
>
> I did not see the hypervisor part of these patches appear in my
> xen-devel inbox. Is this a problem on my end, or were they not sent to
> the list? If so, I'm interested in them, so it'd be great if they could
> be sent to the list.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Frank
It's quite strange...
Here is the patches(attached). Send them again...
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
1.patch
Description: Text Data
2.patch
Description: Text Data
3.patch
Description: Text Data
4.patch
Description: Text Data
5.patch
Description: Text Data
6.patch
Description: Text Data
7.patch
Description: Text Data
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
| 
Home