| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/6] PM extension to domU
> So this is the point about definition about driver domains. If we
> consider driver domain as the part of I/O virtualization service
> provider like dom0, minios-style is perfectly right and quick.
> However we have to consider the cases where user just wants
> device passthrough for performance. Actually most requirements
> on the list before driver domain was back to xen3.0, are all related
> to a full guest which doesn't provide backend service to others.
>
> Then actually we have two scenarios:
> - Minios-driver domains created automatically to balance I/O
> virtualization, as part of increasing overall xen performance
> - Full guest with direct device assignment just for performance,
> which is created by user manually
Kevin, Keir,
Are Mini-OS based driver domains possible today? Is there a group
working on this?
Thanks,
Aravindh
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home