Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] tools: fix xen-detect to correctly identify domU type

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 23/03/16 10:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 23.03.16 at 11:14, <JGross@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 7. Report type according to features found (this is a little bit
>>    ugly: we have to rely on the current hypervisor implementation
>>    regarding the bits set for the different guest types).
> Well, in some of the cases feature flags only make sense for one
> kind of guest, so if such a flag is set it could be used as positive
> indication (while it being clear may then still mean nothing).
>
>> Would it make sense to add another file to /sys/hypervisor/properties?
>> Something like guest_type, containing "pv", "hvm" or "pvh"? If existing
>> this could be used to report the guest type.
> That would seem a good idea to me. What do others, namely
> Linux maintainers, think?

I would recommend against differentiating hvm and pvh, especially as pvh
is being replaced with hvmlite.

If you want more generic terms which might be acceptable to Linux, how
about "ring deprivileged" (which applies to UML and Lguest), and
"hardware extensions"?

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel