login
Header Space

 
 

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima@...>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...>, <kvm-devel@...>, Avi Kivity <avi@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Monday, September 17, 2007 - 3:15 pm

Nakajima, Jun wrote:

I don't see a particular problem with that.  If the whole 0x4xxxxxxx
range is reserved for hypervisor use, and existing hypervisors are
already using 0x400000xx in hypervisor-specific ways, then it makes
sense to start the generic stuff at 0x40001xxx (or some other offset). 
But without a few more implementations of the "generic" interface its
all a bit moot (ie, where's your code? ;).


This just seems a bit grotty.  You're relying on the fact that you can
overlay Xen's current use of 0x4000000x for the generic interface by
freezing Xen's current use of 40000000-2.  0x40000000 becomes a more or
less useless hypervisor-identification signature (useless because you
need to assume that leaves 4000000x, x>2 implement the generic interface
anyway, where x=1,2 are reserved for Xen (=hypervisor-specific) uses).

In other words, what mechanism can a guest use to explicitly identify
the existence of the generic interface?  There needs to be a signature
for that somewhere.

    J
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Fri Sep 14, 3:45 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Sep 14, 4:53 pm)
Re: [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Rusty Russell, (Fri Sep 14, 10:35 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Fri Sep 14, 5:02 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Sep 14, 5:22 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Fri Sep 14, 5:46 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Sep 14, 5:52 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Fri Sep 14, 6:08 pm)
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Nakajima, Jun, (Fri Sep 14, 6:40 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Sep 14, 7:00 pm)
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Nakajima, Jun, (Fri Sep 14, 8:10 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Sep 14, 8:28 pm)
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Nakajima, Jun, (Fri Sep 14, 9:04 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Sat Sep 15, 12:53 am)
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Nakajima, Jun, (Sat Sep 15, 2:11 am)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Sat Sep 15, 2:23 pm)
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Nakajima, Jun, (Mon Sep 17, 2:14 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Mon Sep 17, 3:15 pm)
RE: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Nakajima, Jun, (Mon Sep 17, 4:52 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Mon Sep 17, 2:27 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Mon Sep 17, 3:15 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Mon Sep 17, 3:33 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Zachary Amsden, (Fri Sep 14, 5:20 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Fri Sep 14, 5:44 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Zachary Amsden, (Fri Sep 14, 11:37 pm)
Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure, Anthony Liguori, (Sat Sep 15, 1:33 pm)
speck-geostationary