 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] HVM hypercalls
| To: | <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-devel] HVM hypercalls |
| From: | "Ky Srinivasan" <ksrinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 15 Dec 2006 11:46:48 -0700 |
| Delivery-date: | Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:47:00 -0800 |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| 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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| Sender: | xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Currently, only a very small subset of the hypercalls are exposed to HVM guests. Was this set arrived at based on what was required to host para-virtualized drivers? Or are there other considerations that governed this decision. Specifically, would there be any objections to opening up more hypercalls to HVM guests. Regards, K. Y _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH][PVFB][LINUX] Fix possible sleep while holding spinlock, Markus Armbruster |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] schedule() vs softirqs, Hollis Blanchard |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-devel] schedule() vs softirqs, Hollis Blanchard |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Xen-devel] HVM hypercalls, Keir Fraser |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
