RE: [Xen-devel] HW Virtualization Abstraction Layer Work Underway

["Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>]

leendert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> # Good news is that 'xvm' appears in the sources precisely zero times.
> 
> Let me put in my $0.02, I don't like xvm, or hwassist, hwasst. xvm
> looks like I mistyped vmx and hwassist/hwasst are not descriptive
> enough and too long.

Leendert, you are right. After actually using more 'xvm' in the code (to
show examples), it started flickering between 'vmx' and 'xvm'; it's not
good for the eyes.

> 
> What about hve or hvx for Hardware Virtualization Extensions? Elsie
> seems to prefer something with hardware in it to convey that this is
> silicon thing.
> 
>       Leendert

I like Hardware Virtualization Extensions. It's simple and captures its
own purpose well. 

'hve' seems better after Web search, "Did you mean: have". No hits in
the xen source code except (common/sched_sedf.c):
*     -addition: experiments hve shown that this may have a HUGE impact
on

I think that's "Did you mean: have" :-)

We'll post our modification proposal to Elsis's doc today.

Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center

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