Anthony Liguori wrote:
quoted text > Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, see, the initial goal was to make it possible to use the KVM
> > > paravirtualizations on other hypervisors. However, I don't think
this
quoted text > > > is really going to be possible in general so maybe it's better to
just
quoted text > > > use leaf 0. I'll let others chime in before sending a new patch.
> > >
> >
> > Hm. Obviously you can just define a signature for "kvm-compatible
> > hypercall interface" and make it common that way, but it gets tricky
if
quoted text > > the hypervisor supports multiple hypercall interfaces, including the
kvm
quoted text > > one. Start the kvm leaves at 0x40001000 or something?
> >
>
> Yeah, that works with me.
To me this is the beginning of fragmentation. Why do we need different
and VMM-specific Linux paravirtualization for hardware-assisted
virtualization? That would not be good for Linux.
quoted text >
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>
> > J
Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center
-
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure , Nakajima, Jun , (Fri Sep 14, 6:40 pm)