Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:55:36 -0800 | From | Zachary Amsden <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/21] Xen-paravirt: Xen guest implementation for paravirt_ops interface |
| |
Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Sat, 17 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > > >> That was always its intention. It's not a direct interface to a hypervisor, >> but an somewhat abstracted interface to a "hypervisor driver" >> > > I thought that hypervisor driver was some binary blob that can be directly > accessed via paravirt_ops? >
There are no more binary blobs being used by paravirt-ops hypervisors. I prefer the term "open hypercode layer".
>> But you're right that there are currently still quite a lot of hooks >> being added. I plan to be much more strict on that in the future. >> > > And it seems that the hooks are not generic but bound to a particular > hypervisor. Should the Xen specific stuff not be in the binary blob? >
Xen doesn't use a hypercode layer, and there is no way to do what they need to do without hooks in the kernel.
Zach - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |