This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] libxl: enabling upstream qemu as pure pv bac

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 14:00 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > I don't think is a good idea to reset all these value to 0 here,
> > > considering that the info parameter can be passed by the user.
> > > It is better to use another libxl_device_model_info local variable and
> > > just copy the very few fields we care about.
> > > Otherwise in the stubdom case above you'll have the unwanted side effect
> > > of removing useful informations of the stubdom from the structure.
> > 
> > I think ideally the struct would be the same for both the PV and FV qemu
> > and the device model create would only pay attention to the bits which
> > fit the scenario (i.e. the PV case would ignore vcpus != 0, not zero
> > it).
> > 
> > This allows us to pass the same instance to both the PV and FV arg
> > constructions routines in the stubdom+PV qemu case.
> I wouldn't be opposed to it.
> The reason I didn't suggest to make this change now is that I see a
> certain argument to keep the vfb settings separate, considering that vfb
> can be thought as implementation independent protocol.

Hmm, that's an interesting case, but I think:

if qemu-for-PV guest:
        vfb args -> xenpv qemu (no brainer, it's the only one)
if non-stub qemu-for-FV guest:
        vfb args -> xenfv qemu (no brainer, it's the only one)
if stub qemu-for-FV guest:
        vfb args -> xenpv qemu process (what the user connects to)
        do the right thing internally args -> xenfv in stub domain

IOW in the stub case the args for the stub FV qemu are an implementation
detail within libxl.


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>