| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue
Markus Armbruster wrote:
> I really don't understand why we need this level of generality and
> complexity, in particular when a simple hypercall to query a domain's
> width would do. Or a simple, stupid version number in the shared
> page. We'll hardly end up with an unmanageable number of versions.
A simple hypercall will *not* do for paravirtualized drivers in fully
virtualized domains.
cheers,
Gerd
--
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
| <Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, (continued)
- [Xen-devel] 32-on-64 broken in unstable., Gerd Hoffmann
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64 broken in unstable., Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64 broken in unstable., Gerd Hoffmann
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Markus Armbruster
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Gerd Hoffmann
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Markus Armbruster
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue,
Gerd Hoffmann <=
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Ian Campbell
- Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Markus Armbruster
- [Xen-devel] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Liang Yang
- [Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-users] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Petersson, Mats
- [Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Liang Yang
- [Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-users] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Petersson, Mats
|
|
|
| |
|
Home