[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] HVMLite / PVHv2 - using x86 EFI boot entry
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:53:47AM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 13/04/16 20:52, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 04:44:54PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> So more to it, if the EFI entry already provides a way into Linux > >>> in a more streamlined fashion bringing it closer to the bare metal > >>> boot entry, why *would* we add another boot entry to x86, even if > >>> its small and self contained ? > >> > >> We would avoid using EFI if: > > > > And this is what I was looking for, thanks! > > > >> * Being called both on real hardware and under Xen would make the EFI > >> entry point more complicated > > > > That's on the EFI Linux maintainer to assess. And he seems willing to > > consider this. > > > >> * Adding the necessary EFI support into Xen would be a significant > >> chunk of extra work > > > > This seems to be a good sticking point, but Andi noted another aspect > > of this or redundancy as well. > > > >> * Requiring PVH mode to implement EFI would make it more difficult for > >> other kernes (NetBSD, FreeBSD) to act as dom0s. > > > > What if this is an option only then ? > > > >> > >> * Requiring PVH mode to use EFI would make it more difficult to > >> support unikernel-style workloads for domUs. > > > > What if this is an option only then ? > > So first of all, you asked why anyone would oppose EFI, and this is part > of the answer to that. > > Secondly, you mean "What if this is the only thing the Linux maintainers > will accept?" And you already know the answer to that. No, I meant to ask, would it be possible to make booting HVMLite using EFI be optional ? That way if you already support EFI that can be used on your entires with some small modifications. > How much of a burden it would be on the rest of the open-source > ecosystem (Xen, *BSDs, &c) is a combination of some as-yet unknown facts > (i.e., what a minimal Xen/Linux EFI interface would look like) and a > matter of judgement (i.e., given the same interface, reasonable people > may come to different conclusions about whether the interface is an > undue burden to impose on others or not). > > But I would hope that the Linux maintainers would at least consider the > broader community when weighing their decisions, and not take advantage > of their position of dominance to simply ignore the effect of their > choices on everybody else. This has nothing to do with dominance or anything nefarious, I'm asking simply for a full engineering evaluation of all possibilities, with the long term in mind. Not for now, but for hardware assumptions which are sensible 5 years from now. Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |