Réf. : [Xen-ia64-devel] Time for hybrid virtualization?

[jean-paul.pigache@xxxxxxxx]

Alex and all,

we, in Bull,  are using Xen-ia64 to provide logical partitioning for Linux physical partitions in our mainframe systems running on Itanium.
Some of these systems have been delivered with Madison CPUs which are non-VT.
So I would vote for keeping the support of paravirtualization.

On the technical side, I agree with the long-term objective, but performance is a major point and I think we should not discard paravirtualization until we have verified that there is no performance regression with most of the CPUs installed in Itanium systems.
Knowing that performance will be better with Tukwila is a valuable information for a long term objective but Tukwila is not what is installed to-day.
So my opinion is that removing paravirtualization may be a good choice for the long term, but deciding to do it now is premature.

Best regards
Jean-Paul

Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxx> Envoyé par : xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 17/01/2008 01:02

Pour :        xen-ia64-devel <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>         cc :                 Objet :        [Xen-ia64-devel] Time for hybrid virtualization?

   Is it possible?  Is it a good idea?  What are some of the issues?  We
would lose support for non-VT capable processors (pre-Montecito), but is
that so bad?  Is it a "fast track" to upstream Linux Xen/ia64 support?
Let me know your thoughts.  Thanks,

                 Alex

[1] http://ols.108.redhat.com/2007/Reprints/nakajima-Reprint.pdf

-- 
Alex Williamson                             HP Open Source & Linux Org.


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel