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-ia64-devel] Time for hybrid virtualization?

To: <tgingold@xxxxxxx>, "Alex Williamson" <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Time for hybrid virtualization?
From: "Xu, Anthony" <anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:43:49 +0800
Cc: xen-ia64-devel <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 01:44:10 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1200561588.478f1db46381a@xxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <1200528127.6773.88.camel@lappy> <1200561588.478f1db46381a@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AchY6idOe0hOz4ElRl+0ndSicVfkLwAADREg
Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel] Time for hybrid virtualization?
tgingold@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi,
> here are my random thoughts:
> * First, I am all for supporting dom0 VTi (as well as dom0 PV).  This
>   should be an intermediate step.  Intel did that in the past,
>   although I am not sure it was fully virtualized (what about GFW ?)
Dom0 Vti didn't use GFW, mostly it used native FW, while Xen provide
Fake information, such as memory map block, and Xen will inject some
Sal/Pal call.

> * Building a dom0 vti means porting backend, balloon and all other
>   drivers to Vti.
Dom0 Vti just mean that cpu virtulaization is using VT-i( privileged
intruction emulation).
All other should be same.
We may need to modify backend, ballon and other drivers a little.

> * What about performance on Montecito ?  If Montecito Vti is ~55% of
>   Montvale, I'd prefer to keep PV.
KB on Montecito Vti can get 85% of native,
Roughly calculate,  Montecito Vti is ~95% of Montvale.
Tukwila Vti should be faster, it adds more VT hardware support.

> * Do we want to abandon PV domains ?  Siemens people may still use
>   them.  I am not sure there is a large gain in abandoning linux dom0
>   PV but keeping linux domU PV.
Want to see Siemens people's opinion.

- Anthony

Xen-ia64-devel mailing list

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