[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] HVMLite / PVHv2 - using x86 EFI boot entry
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:02:26PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 08:50:10PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:54:29AM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 11:58:54PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > > OK thanks for the clarification -- still no custom entries for Xen! > > > > We should strive for that, at the very least. > > > > > > > > You do have a point about the legacy stuff. There are two options there: > > > > > > > > * Fold legacy support under HVMLite -- which seems to be what we > > > > currently want to do (we should evaluate the implications and > > > > requirements here for that); or > > > > > > I'm not following here. What does it mean to fold legacy support under > > > HVMlite? HVMlite doesn't have any legacy hardware, and that's the issue > > > when > > > it comes to using native Linux entry points. Linux might expect some > > > legacy > > > PC hardware to be always present, which is not true for HVMlite. > > > > > > Could you please clarify this point? > > > > It seems there is a confusion on terms used. By folding legacy support under > > HVMLite I meant folding legacy PV path (classic PV with PV interfaces) under > > HVMlite. > > Ewww. Probably a confusion again on terms, by the above I meant to say what you seem to be indicating below, which is to keep old PV guest support with PV interfaces using a new shiny entry. Or are we really going to nuke full support for old PV guests ? > > I got the impression that if we wanted to remove the old PV path we had to > > see > > if we can address old classic PV x86 guests through HVMlite, otherwise we'd > > have to live with the old PV path for the long term. > > No. We need to deprecate the PV paths - and the agreement we hammered out > with the x86 maintainers was that once PVH/HVMLite is stable the clock > would start ticking on PV (pvops) life. All the big users of PV Linux > were told in persons to prep them for this. That's nice. *How* that is done is what we are determining here. > Keep in mind that this is not for deleting of support in hypervisor for > PV hypercalls - meaning you would still be able to run say 2.6.18 RHEL5 > in years to come. It is just that Linux v6.1 won't have any more PV paths > and can only run in HVM or PVH/HVMLite mode under Xen. Sure. Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |